Coles, Nicholas A.Tenney, Elizabeth R.Chin, Jason M.Friedrich, Jack C.O'Dea, Rose E.Holcombe, Alex O.2025-06-112025-06-110036-8075WOS:001253276700001PubMed:38843342ORCID:/0000-0002-6573-2670/work/166491883https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=anu_research_portal_plus2&SrcAuth=WosAPI&KeyUT=WOS:001253276700001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=WOS_CPLhttps://hdl.handle.net/1885/733758977When researchers collaboratively tackle challenging questions—such as those related to climate change, the impact of artificial intelligence, or the nature of consciousness—they often encounter disagreements that are difficult to resolve (1). When disagreements persist, what should the team members do? Options may seem limited to coauthoring a paper they disagree with, delaying the next steps of the project in hopes that consensus will eventually be reached, or leaving without credit. However, there is a better approach: transparently documenting the disagreements.enScience2024-06-0610.1126/science.ado707085195438711