GCRI · Registry
Participation records
Participation records name the people and organisations involved in a programme or a work: contributors, participants, partners and reviewers. They carry recognition, but also obligations, because naming someone discloses something about them. This page sets out how consent is recorded and honoured, how contributions are credited with standard roles and identifiers, how programme boundaries are stated, and what happens when consent is withdrawn or attribution is disputed.
Participation records on the record.
Participation records: how the risk develops.
Consent, recognition and programme boundaries. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.
Consent scope creep
Consent is given for one purpose, such as listing in a programme, and the record is later reused for another, such as publicity, analytics or a partner directory. Without the scope recorded beside the name, reuse quietly exceeds what the person agreed to.
Identity collision
Two contributors with similar names are merged, or one person appears as several. Credit goes to the wrong person, a withdrawal request misses some records, and a disclosure meant for one person reaches another.
Boundary blur
A partner named in one project is listed as a member of the whole programme, or an adviser appears as an endorser. Readers infer affiliation, endorsement or responsibility that no one agreed to.
Withdrawal does not propagate
A person withdraws consent and the primary record is updated, but exports, caches, partner copies and search indexes still carry the name. The harm the withdrawal was meant to prevent continues downstream.
How participation records is modelled, measured and tested.
The model, its assumptions, its data and its uncertainty, in the form a scientist or engineer would check. Structures follow published methods. The values drawn are illustrative, not findings.
Datasets and provenance
The data classes behind participation records and what is recorded about each before it is used.
| Data class | Provenance recorded | Resolution stated | Licence checked |
|---|---|---|---|
| Satellite imagery, optical and radar | sensor, processing level, acquisition date | pixel size and revisit | per scene |
| Reanalysis and climate model output | model, experiment, member, version | grid and time step | per release |
| In-situ sensors and gauges | station, instrument, calibration record | point and sampling rate | per network |
| Population and asset exposure | method, vintage, input sources | cell size and unit | per release |
| Boundaries and reference geography | producer, edition, date | scale | per edition |
- Lineage
- W3C PROV record from source to figure
- Principles
- FAIR: findable, accessible, interoperable, reusable
- Gaps
- shown as missing, never filled silently
Participation records show who took part in each domain’s work, and nothing more.
- WaterIn practiceA utility that contributed data is recorded as a contributor, not a member.What a reader can checkRole recorded
- HealthIn practiceExperts on a review panel are recorded with declared interests.What a reader can checkInterest declarations
- BiodiversityIn practiceCommunities that shared knowledge are recorded with consent terms.What a reader can checkConsent and withdrawal
Participation records support the contributor roles printed in Reports (CRediT). Personal data in records follow the applicable privacy law.
- Requests to correct or withdraw a record.
- Questions about how a record is used.
What is measured, and how well.
Each indicator carries its unit, its cadence, the kind of source behind it and the evidence label a value would carry. No values are shown: a programme supplies them under its own authority.
| Indicator | Unit | Cadence | Source type | Label |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participation records with a current consent status | share of records naming a person | monthly | Consent register | DECLARED |
| Records with consent scope stated | share of records naming a person | monthly | Schema validation | OBSERVED |
| Contributors with a persistent identifier | share of contributors | monthly | Identifier linkage | OBSERVED |
| Contributions described with CRediT roles | share of contributions | per output | Contributor metadata | DECLARED |
| Records with a stated programme boundary | share of participation records | quarterly | Schema validation | OBSERVED |
| Withdrawal requests completed within the policy period | share of requests | quarterly | Case records | OBSERVED |
| Attribution disputes raised | count | quarterly | Integrity office records | REPORTED |
Where the evidence comes from.
Named public datasets and institutional records, each with its licence class. Sources by agreement are used only under their terms and never republished.
| Source | What it gives | Licence class |
|---|---|---|
| CRediT, Contributor Roles Taxonomy (ANSI/NISO Z39.104) | Standard roles describing each contributor’s part in a research output | Open standard, free to use |
| ORCID registry | Persistent identifiers and consent-based connections between researchers and their records | CC0 for the public data file |
| ROR (Research Organization Registry) | Identifiers for partner organisations and their relationships | CC0 |
| W3C Data Privacy Vocabulary (DPV) | Terms for purposes, legal bases, consent states and processing operations | W3C community licence, free to use |
| GA4GH Data Use Ontology | Machine-readable terms for consent-based conditions on data use | Open ontology, attribution |
| ICMJE recommendations | Criteria for authorship and for acknowledging non-author contributors | Free to read |
Who decides, and what the evidence serves.
Registry prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.
| Who decides | The question | Evidence this page serves |
|---|---|---|
| Research ethics boards | Whether consent covers the proposed listing, reuse or disclosure of participants | Recorded consent scope, its date and the uses each record supports |
| Data protection officers | Whether a lawful basis exists for processing and publishing personal data in a record | Purpose, legal basis, retention and withdrawal history for each record |
| Journal editors and research integrity offices | How to resolve an authorship or attribution dispute | Contributor roles, identifiers and the history of changes to the contributor list |
| Programme stewards | Who may be listed as a partner, member or contributor, and in what capacity | Signed participation terms and the stated boundary of each role |
Outputs this topic produces
- Participation views showing each named party’s role, identifier and programme boundary
- Consent status and scope recorded beside every personal name
- A withdrawal route listing the records and known copies it reaches
- Contributor role records using CRediT terms where they apply
What experts ask about participation records.
- What consent is needed before a person or institution is named, and how is it withdrawn?
- How should roles be described so that credit is accurate and comparable?
- How can recognition be given without creating a credential or an employment record?
- How much personal data does a participation record need?
- How are institutional names protected from implied endorsement?
Where participation records go wrong.
Contribution records fail in predictable ways. Gift and honorary authorship overstate some contributions, while data collectors, community researchers and technical staff are often left out. Lists of participating institutions are read as partnerships or endorsements. Records collected for one purpose are reused for another without consent. Research communities have responded with contributor-role taxonomies that describe what each person actually did, and with persistent identifiers that people control themselves.
Data protection law and research ethics add a further rule: collect only what the purpose requires. Methods from digital identity and public digital systems show how a person can be identified reliably while disclosing as little as possible.
How the Registry approaches it.
- 01
Consent first
A person or institution is named only as they agreed, for the purpose they agreed, and consent can be withdrawn.
- 02
Described roles
Roles follow a published vocabulary of contribution types, never titles that imply authority.
- 03
Minimal data
Records hold the least personal data needed, and protected details stay out of public views.
- 04
Limits
A participation record is not a licence, a qualification, an appointment or an employment record. Self-reported roles can be inaccurate, and recognition norms differ between disciplines and cultures.
How it is studied, and what the methods cannot say.
- 01Digital identity and public digital systemsIssuer authentication and authority · Contributor disambiguation by the personApplied here
- 02Data engineering, interoperability and stewardshipSchema-validated ingestion · Persistent identifier reconciliation · Lineage capture in pipelinesApplied here
- 03Cybersecurity and cryptographyTamper-evident record history · Signed exports and releases · Threat modelling of edit pathsApplied here
Where this page’s references lead.
The bodies and documents this page is read against. Status and editions change; each link goes to the issuing body.
Questions and answers.
Can I be listed without my consent?
What happens when I withdraw consent?
Why use CRediT roles rather than a plain contributor list?
Does being listed as a partner mean endorsement?
Does a participation record make me a member or an employee?
Can I ask to be removed?
Is an institution named in a record a partner?
Contribute evidence from this page.
Reports is the Consortium’s quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.
- EmailGateway GW-GCRISend it from this pageEvidence, a correction, a case, a method, a review, a translation or profile input. It arrives tagged with this page, so the editor who owns it receives it.
- ZenodoOpen depositDeposit it and submit to the communityPublish your own record on Zenodo with your ORCID iD, then submit it to the Reports community there. Curators review it; the DOI stays yours.
- ReportsGCRISee every way to contributeThe contribution types, how each is reviewed, what credit you receive, the licence and what is never accepted.
Never send personal data, sensitive infrastructure detail or anything you have no right to share. A contribution is reviewed before use; sending it confers no authorship or editorial rights, and sponsorship never buys a finding.
Bring a method, a dataset or a question.
Information and enquiries are open today. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.
Legal documents.
Maps, data and figures on this site are shown for context and general information. They are not advice, forecasts or warnings; the limits of the information are set out in the Disclaimers and Data Notices.