6th Author Pub...

[nemo123]

I know people tend to ask frequently about first author pubs vs second author pubs, but my situation is kind of different... So I just found out that I'm going to be the 6th author on a pub out of 12 authors. Is this okay?

On top of that, it looks like the last 5 authors are PIs... So I'm really 6th out of 7 authors...

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Narmerguy]

A pub is a pub. After 1st author there's no real difference for our purposes. Congratulations.

 

[aSagacious]

a pub is a pub. After 1st author there's no real difference for our purposes. Congratulations.

+1

 

[EnergyDrink]

On top of that, it looks like the last 5 authors are PIs... So I'm really 6th out of 7 authors...

You're 6 out of 12. But don't refer to it as a "6th author".
If you're not first or last you're usually referred to as "2nd author", at least in my experience.

Its not so much that you're the 2nd person listed, but rather you're not the primary contributor (you're secondary)

Not sure why you would discount the PIs.

 

[blizzah]

I know people tend to ask frequently about first author pubs vs second author pubs, but my situation is kind of different... So I just found out that I'm going to be the 6th author on a pub out of 12 authors. Is this okay?

On top of that, it looks like the last 5 authors are PIs... So I'm really 6th out of 7 authors...

Don't worry about it. It's not like you can change it. It's still a really good achievement.

You can also look at it like you are 7th last

 

[Shooter McGavin]

I just recently had the same question. I just got published as the 3rd author for a publication that just got sent into Cell. My PI informed me that anything after the first author is always "second" author, doesn't matter if your 6th or 11th. Congratulations on your achievement.

 

[JFK90787]

Basically worthless if you are not 1st author and the journal doesn't have an impact factor of 30+. Probably not even worth including on your app, it might hurt your chances. You can always include it if you apply Caribbean I guess /sdngunner

 

[dmf2682]

Just make sure you can explain the paper if asked about it. It would be embarrassing to not know when listed as an author.

 

[gumbyj]

Basically worthless if you are not 1st author and the journal doesn't have an impact factor of 30+. Probably not even worth including on your app, it might hurt your chances. You can always include it if you apply Caribbean I guess /sdngunner

 

[nemo123]

Oh! I never knew that everyone past the first author (and before the PIs) is collectively the second author... Well, I didn't include the PIs in my first post because they're supposed to go last on the paper and they fund/look at results/think of more experiments for the paper. Although I have no idea who three of those PIs even are, especially since the first seven authors work in two PIs' labs...

 

[Finches]

Some schools require you to list the citation of the paper, from which they can just see where you are in the list of names for themselves.

And at more than half of my interviews, my interviewers had looked up my publications that I listed as well.

So what you write doesn't really matter. Just explain your role and the project well. If you were 6th, you weren't a significant contributer to the paper, so I would advise against doing anything that tries to make it seem otherwise (not that you are intending).

P.S. My PI refers non-1st authors as "secondary" authors, not "second" authors.

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

You're 6 out of 12. But don't refer to it as a "6th author".
If you're not first or last you're usually referred to as "2nd author", at least in my experience.

Its not so much that you're the 2nd person listed, but rather you're not the primary contributor (you're secondary)

Not sure why you would discount the PIs.

Probably cause PIs are usually listed last.

A paper is a paper man which is more than I had. Congratulations.

 

[kasho11]

2nd place is just the 1st loser

 

[FIREitUP]

You're 6 out of 12. But don't refer to it as a "6th author".
If you're not first or last you're usually referred to as "2nd author", at least in my experience.

Its not so much that you're the 2nd person listed, but rather you're not the primary contributor (you're secondary)

Not sure why you would discount the PIs.

Is this true? I've never heard this before.

 

[gumbyj]

Is this true? I've never heard this before.

I have heard differing things on this, but "middle authors" (3-xx) are usually always considered the same. 1st, 2nd and last (PI whose grant funded the research) are different. Some may disagree, but in most people I have encountered the 2nd author was considered to have contributed more than the middle authors.

 

[Frazier]

If you're not first or last you're usually referred to as "2nd author", at least in my experience.

One should include the full citation on AMCAS.

Maybe it is dependent on lab culture, but around my neck of the woods:

1st author >>> 2nd author >> 3-XXX author

If a premed said they were "second author" in a narrative but is actually listed as 6th author, I think that premed would get at.

 

[pkwraith]

6th author is not equivilant to 2nd author. To think the first author can't determine who out of 12 people made the most contribution is silly.

Cite your paper, state your contribution, and sell yourself. Don't describe yourself as 2nd author.

 

[gumbyj]

One should include the full citation on AMCAS.

Maybe it is dependent on lab culture, but around my neck of the woods:

1st author >>> 2nd author >> 3-XXX author

This is my experience as well.

 

[saveourpens]

Just wanted to chip in, at least in my lab there is a definite order and 2nd does not equal 3rd or 4th. For instance, the guy downstairs who did all the x-ray crystallography work but had no say in the experiment is behind all lab members.

 

[catzzz88]

One should include the full citation on AMCAS.

Full citation? One of my papers has over 50 authors...
should I just:
1) Use "John Doe et. al" as the author and then they can go look it up if they want. Only problem with this is that I am not the first author... I am the 7th/50...
2) Name the paper and provide the PMID?

I obviously can't include the entire citation (not even sure if the char. count limit would allow me!)
I also definitely want to include the paper because it is actually published in Nature, so I can't just leave this off...

Ideas?

Thanks!
C

 

[Frazier]

Full citation? One of my papers has over 50 authors...
should I just:
1) Use "John Doe et. al" as the author and then they can go look it up if they want. Only problem with this is that I am not the first author... I am the 7th/50...
2) Name the paper and provide the PMID?

I obviously can't include the entire citation (not even sure if the char. count limit would allow me!)
I also definitely want to include the paper because it is actually published in Nature, so I can't just leave this off...

Ideas?

Thanks!
C

if you have characters to spare in that activity, list up to your name then whip out the "el al." to follow your name.

you're right. obviously you can't include the entire citation in the case of a paper w 50 authors.

ps: nice work on getting in nature, even as "only" 7th author -- I am jealous

 

[235009]

So I just found out that I'm going to be the 6th author on a pub out of 12 authors. Is this okay?

it's not ok. you should march into your PI's office and demand he make you first author or else you're going to quit!

If you're not first or last you're usually referred to as "2nd author", at least in my experience.

this is not true. don't call yourself "second author" if you aren't. that would be a lie and you'd be making a fool of yourself. maybe you're thinking of "secondary author" as someone mentioned earlier which would be less ridiculous of a claim but your intent would still be to mislead.

 

[Stewabeet]

Just wanted to add in another .02 to say that in our lab culture as well, generally speaking:

1st author>>>>>>2nd author>>>>middle folks

I wouldn't call yourself a second author, since evidently that means different things at different institutions - don't want to accidentally misrepresent!

 

[1TB4RKSB4CK]

I hear 1st and 2nd author have similar recognition status with 1st being obviously a little more higher. Then after that it's fair game from 3rd-100 authors.

 

[deleted393595]

From my experience, 1st author is the one who writes up the paper, 2nd author and the others helped out, and the PI is the very last author because that recognizes his role as a mentor and experiment devisor.

Congrats on authorship! Surviving the process of project start to completion and paper submission is no mean feat!

 

[tantacles]

From my experience, 1st author is the one who writes up the paper, 2nd author and the others helped out, and the PI is the very last author because that recognizes his role as a mentor and experiment devisor.

Congrats on authorship! Surviving the process of project start to completion and paper submission is no mean feat!

Put into more practical terms, the last author is the one who got the money to do the paper.

 

[Danlee07]

...

If the crystallographer had to determine the structure, that person should definitely get more credit...that's a major contribution.

A name is a name on the paper. And it really doesn't matter how much you try to justify your work, but you didn't have such a significant contribution to the idea or development of experiments as an undergrad. You most likely at best know what you're doing (i.e. know what experiments' results mean). So... just know what you did. Don't try to pump it up or make it seem worse. There's still a corresponding author on that paper who matters; if there are questions, the questions are addressed to the corresponding author.