2nd vs 3rd author for an aspiring MD/PhD; worth making a case about?

[warypremed]

I know there a lot of threads on this, but I still wanted some opinions.

The lab I have been working in the past year is in the middle of pulling together a manuscript to submit, and I just found out the order of authors: my PI listed me as 3rd. 1st is the postdoc I work with, 2nd is the research associate. I was pretty much expecting to be 3rd, but hoping for a slight chance at 2nd. Do you think it's worth discussing with the PI to get put as 2nd? As far as total work done, I would say that the RA and I are fairly similar, we were just doing different portions. I suppose I would say that I feel my contributions were greater toward the overall findings of the paper and I did more analysis, but that's IMHO. The other thing is that as far as who necessarily "needs" it more, it is me. The RA has no plans to move to a higher rank for instance, and has been in the lab for 20+ years. She has no plans to attend graduate school, start up her own lab, etc. whereas I am an undergraduate hoping to pursue MD/PhD.

So do you think it's worth discussing or should I just be happy because it won't matter much? I wasn't really planning on "fighting" for 2nd once I found out, but the postdoc I work with came up to me today and said he was surprised that I got 3rd and had tried to lightly nudge and mention to the PI to put me in 2nd. He asked me if I was okay with being 3rd, and I said I was. But I guess then it got me thinking more about it.

The paper may also be turning into 2 papers that will be submitted back to back, and as far as number of authors it is really just postdoc, me, RA, grad student, PI, and PI. I hopefully have another paper from a previous research experience that will be submitted soon. So I guess overall it won't matter, but I just wanted some opinions. Not trying to be a prick by wanting to be 2nd.

Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[warypremed]

You know, I just won't "fight" for it. I don't even know what "fight" I would necessarily give. Still, I guess I'd like some opinions. Anyone else been in this situation?

 

[jmt1984]

I know there a lot of threads on this, but I still wanted some opinions.

The lab I have been working in the past year is in the middle of pulling together a manuscript to submit, and I just found out the order of authors: my PI listed me as 3rd. 1st is the postdoc I work with, 2nd is the research associate. I was pretty much expecting to be 3rd, but hoping for a slight chance at 2nd. Do you think it's worth discussing with the PI to get put as 2nd? As far as total work done, I would say that the RA and I are fairly similar, we were just doing different portions. I suppose I would say that I feel my contributions were greater toward the overall findings of the paper and I did more analysis, but that's IMHO. The other thing is that as far as who necessarily "needs" it more, it is me. The RA has no plans to move to a higher rank for instance, and has been in the lab for 20+ years. She has no plans to attend graduate school, start up her own lab, etc. whereas I am an undergraduate hoping to pursue MD/PhD.

So do you think it's worth discussing or should I just be happy because it won't matter much? I wasn't really planning on "fighting" for 2nd once I found out, but the postdoc I work with came up to me today and said he was surprised that I got 3rd and had tried to lightly nudge and mention to the PI to put me in 2nd. He asked me if I was okay with being 3rd, and I said I was. But I guess then it got me thinking more about it.

The paper may also be turning into 2 papers that will be submitted back to back, and as far as number of authors it is really just postdoc, me, RA, grad student, PI, and PI. I hopefully have another paper from a previous research experience that will be submitted soon. So I guess overall it won't matter, but I just wanted some opinions. Not trying to be a prick by wanting to be 2nd.

Thanks!

Some journals are actually getting much more specific about authorship requirments, but like you said, if you contributed (intellectually) the same amount to the paper, I would talk to the current 2nd author and just say "hey, since we both contributed equally to the work, I think it would really help me out on my application (or whatever) if I was listed as 2nd author, are you ok with that?" if they are, talk to the PI. If not, end of story.

 

[atsai3]

Some journals are actually getting much more specific about authorship requirments, but like you said, if you contributed (intellectually) the same amount to the paper, I would talk to the current 2nd author and just say "hey, since we both contributed equally to the work, I think it would really help me out on my application (or whatever) if I was listed as 2nd author, are you ok with that?" if they are, talk to the PI. If not, end of story.

That's a pretty good suggestion.

The difference between 2nd and 3rd is not worth the cost of (a) being a prick, (b) potentially insulting the RA (by intimating that she is in a dead-end job), and (c) potentially insulting your PI (by suggesting that his judgment was impaired). Even for 2nd authors contemplating a fight for 1st, or co-1st, then depending on the circumstances I tend to advise them to rethink it.

Researchers have exceedingly long memories. Sometimes it's just better bank the goodwill. When you apply to medical school you are going to need a letter from someone who has nothing but good things to say about you.