Approaching PI about author order on paper?

[cobalt314]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I'm a med student that recently worked on an article that's getting ready for submission. I used data from a previously performed study from years ago, analyzed it, and wrote up the findings.

When I asked my PI for input on the paper, he emailed back a draft with an author list that placed another professor that he works with as first author, and myself as second author.

Although I've worked with co-workers (also lower level like me) to get advice & help while working on the paper, the person listed as first author had not been involved with the paper at all during the analysis or writing stages. It is possible that he was involved with the getting the study funded/running, although I had not heard of his involvement previously when other names had been brought up.

I think this author list was intentional by my PI, which makes me apprehensive about asking him about it to (1) understand his rationale for the order and/or (2) considering asking him about possible changes (valid? not valid?)

Is there a certain way to go about approaching him about this?

Or should I just accept the 2nd authorship without further discussion?

The research environment is not a very open or comfortable one. I've seen people get severely mistreated & used to their disadvantage when it's been expedient for those above them.

I would appreciate any advice.

 

[mercaptovizadeh]

I'm a med student that recently worked on an article that's getting ready for submission. I used data from a previously performed study from years ago, analyzed it, and wrote up the findings.

When I asked my PI for input on the paper, he emailed back a draft with an author list that placed another professor that he works with as first author, and myself as second author.

Although I've worked with co-workers (also lower level like me) to get advice & help while working on the paper, the person listed as first author had not been involved with the paper at all during the analysis or writing stages. It is possible that he was involved with the getting the study funded/running, although I had not heard of his involvement previously when other names had been brought up.

I think this author list was intentional by my PI, which makes me apprehensive about asking him about it to (1) understand his rationale for the order and/or (2) considering asking him about possible changes (valid? not valid?)

Is there a certain way to go about approaching him about this?

Or should I just accept the 2nd authorship without further discussion?

The research environment is not a very open or comfortable one. I've seen people get severely mistreated & used to their disadvantage when it's been expedient for those above them.

I would appreciate any advice.

Unfortunately, I don't think there's much you can do about this. Are you planning on asking for a recommendation letter from this PI? If yes, absolutely do not mention anything. You have no power and he has made the author order like this for political/connection reasons. Caveat: this other professor may have been deeply involved in the paper in ways that you are not aware, so his authorship (albeit not first author) may not be unmerited. If you are not asking for a recommendation letter, I suppose you could ask, but all it might lead to is hostility, decreased productivity and ability to get out further papers, etc. with no change in the author order.

Make no mistake, this is not an oversight, it was intentional, and it means that your PI does not shy away from abandoning some core principles of assigning authorship.

 

[Chimneysweep]

As an author on the paper, at the very least, you have the right to know what the first author's contribution was.

You could ask the PI nicely in person what he contributed. If the conversation goes well, you could bring up the possibility of co-equal first authorship since you wrote the paper. This is probably the most diplomatic way of handling the situation.

Good luck.

 

[miz]

If you do decide to discuss this with your PI, it might help if you up front assume that the other professor may have been deeply involved with funding or running the initial study or something like that which would 'merit' such high authorship. That way, you don't begin the conversation on the wrong foot.
But I agree you have much more to potentially lose than to gain, especially since you say that this is not an open lab environment. There is also the possibility that this is the protocol for assigning authorship in this field (?) since you did not collect the data yourself? I have no idea what field this is or if this is the case, but maybe you can see for yourself if this was true?
Since you are a medical student, would a strong letter of recommendation be more valuable to you than a first authorship (which in any case, you are unlikely to get even if you ask)? If your PI is the touchy type, it could even cost you any authorship or worse, give you an (unbeknownst to you) horrible letter of rec. I agree that the authorship order was 110% intentional and is likely already fixed in stone, unfair as it may be.

 

[twright]

I'm a med student that recently worked on an article that's getting ready for submission. I used data from a previously performed study from years ago, analyzed it, and wrote up the findings.

When I asked my PI for input on the paper, he emailed back a draft with an author list that placed another professor that he works with as first author, and myself as second author.

Although I've worked with co-workers (also lower level like me) to get advice & help while working on the paper, the person listed as first author had not been involved with the paper at all during the analysis or writing stages. It is possible that he was involved with the getting the study funded/running, although I had not heard of his involvement previously when other names had been brought up.

I think this author list was intentional by my PI, which makes me apprehensive about asking him about it to (1) understand his rationale for the order and/or (2) considering asking him about possible changes (valid? not valid?)

Is there a certain way to go about approaching him about this?

Or should I just accept the 2nd authorship without further discussion?

The research environment is not a very open or comfortable one. I've seen people get severely mistreated & used to their disadvantage when it's been expedient for those above them.

I would appreciate any advice.

Agree with the other posters that this was not just an oversight. It was intentional. It is reasonable for you to inquire about authorship contributions, but if I were you I would adopt a posture of wanting to know more for the sake of your education (e.g., "I know that these data existed long before I started writing the manuscript...", "wondering if you could tell me a little bit about authorship conventions in our field...", etc).

What is your relationship with your PI and what relationship would you like to have with him in the future?

If the first author was responsible for collecting the data, or was responsible for obtaining the funding, I can see why your PI would place him 1st. But that seems like an odd choice. If this person was responsible for the funding, then it would make more sense for that person to be last author (not first author).

You can easily do your homework by checking this guy's publication record to see if he has worked on similar projects in the past. You can also check NIH Reporter to see if he is the PI on related funding.

If the decision for this guy is for him to be first author, then at this point I would hand over the reins to him. He can finish editing the manuscript, formatting the references, responding to reviewers, etc. It is generally understood that a first author has made the most substantive contributions to the manuscript (which generally means that s/he wrote the first draft).