- Joined
- Aug 11, 2009
- Messages
- 451
- Reaction score
- 6
I'm curious if anyone can shed light on how big the difference between second- first author vs. a truly second author.
I'm working with a resident on a case he saw in the hospital. At the beginning, he asked if I would like to help him with it in exchange for a second authorship. Since then, I've done a lot more work than we originally agreed upon. At first I was going to be mainly responsible for the case report, and he would read all the current articles and do the discussion.
As we proceed with this article, I am becoming more and more involved and it is definitely utilizing more of my time. I was thinking of asking him if he would name me as a second-first author instead of as a second author as we originally planned. The doubt in my mind stems from the fact that this will be my first paper, and I feel like my resident may be taking advantage of that fact.
Anyway, hence my question: Is it worth having a potentially awkward conversation to change from a second author (in a paper that will be him, me, and the attending) to co-first authors and the attending last. Even if we are co-authors, I would still let his name come first because I think that'd be a little childish if I insisted on alphabetical and thus, my name would be first.
I'm working with a resident on a case he saw in the hospital. At the beginning, he asked if I would like to help him with it in exchange for a second authorship. Since then, I've done a lot more work than we originally agreed upon. At first I was going to be mainly responsible for the case report, and he would read all the current articles and do the discussion.
As we proceed with this article, I am becoming more and more involved and it is definitely utilizing more of my time. I was thinking of asking him if he would name me as a second-first author instead of as a second author as we originally planned. The doubt in my mind stems from the fact that this will be my first paper, and I feel like my resident may be taking advantage of that fact.
Anyway, hence my question: Is it worth having a potentially awkward conversation to change from a second author (in a paper that will be him, me, and the attending) to co-first authors and the attending last. Even if we are co-authors, I would still let his name come first because I think that'd be a little childish if I insisted on alphabetical and thus, my name would be first.
) can spin it all they like, but when people look at a publication on your CV, with you listed second, they aren't going to see you as the Co- first author, they are going to see you as the second author. Ones own posturing and how they footnote it doesn't make it so. You can't dictate how the industry is going to look at it. If you work someplace that does it alphabetically, change your name to Aaaron Aaaronson quick.
