Authorship dispute?

[loungebunny]

---

Members do not see this ad.

---

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

If someone rewrote the whole manuscript save for three figures, then they would be first author, not you. Furthermore, if they threw out most of the data you worked on (or everyone in front of you contributed even more, or worked on an experiment more vital to the paper), then they would be totally justified in bumping you far down the author list. Not saying this happened, but if it did then you don't have a leg to stand on.

This would hardly be the first time that someone got intentionally screwed over by a spiteful PI though. So if it is indeed the case that your PI is unjustly sending you down the author list just to spite you then your options for recourse are, well, nothing. The way academia works is that the PI gets the final say in who gets what authorship. While journals do have grievance procedures for authorship disputes, they almost always get decided in the PI's favor, with the exceptions being the situations where a person can prove an especially egregious authorship accusation (eg: you do all the experiments, the paper consists only of data from said experiments, and you aren't even listed as an author).

Regardless, I can guarantee you this isn't worth fighting over. Yes, it sucks, but it's going to suck a lot more if you make a public feud over this. Even if you win, you run a big risk of being labeled a troublemaker and being effectively blacklisted from academia. Unless this paper is going into a journal like Nature, pretend you don't care.

 

[chemsmith]

Why did you leave the lab? If you left on your own accord without completing the manuscript, did you expect someone else to finish it and leave you first author? Not trying to be harsh but in the lab I work at the PI has offered me multiple jobs completing projects that someone walked away from, he really doesnt like that.

 

[slz1900]

There's nothing you can do. The PI can decide the author order however he or she chooses. It's a bummer, but at least you're still listed.

 

[music2doc]

Did anyone have problem with this?

I was in a lab for a few years and produced considerable amount of data. I left the lab (not exactly in good terms with the P.I.) when the manuscript for the paper was finished.

Long story short, this paper has been worked upon by someone else, and now only 3 of my figures are left in the final manuscript (3 out of 5 total figures). The funny thing is, I've been bumped from first to FOURTH author on this paper. It seems like some summer high school student (who did a few PCRs) is going to end up in front of me.😡😡😡 It seems like P.I. is doing everything in his power to make me suffer!!

This lab is in a reputable school. Does anyone know how to approach this problem??

The guy rewrote the ENTIRE paper. You're lucky they even put you on as an author and not just an acknowledgement. Sorry, dude. That's how it works. Don't play the victim here. Play the game.

 

[slz1900]

The guy rewrote the ENTIRE paper. You're lucky they even put you on as an author and not just an acknowledgement. Sorry, dude. That's how it works. Don't play the victim here. Play the game.

Uh, who do you think is listed as a coauthor on papers if not the person who contributes the majority of the figures? OP isn't "lucky" to be listed, and in fact the placement sounds a bit unfair, but yes, you are right that there is nothing to be done.

 

[music2doc]

Uh, who do you think is listed as a coauthor on papers if not the person who contributes the majority of the figures? OP isn't "lucky" to be listed, and in fact the placement sounds a bit unfair, but yes, you are right that there is nothing to be done.

He contributed figures and left the lab. Someone else redid the entire paper. Only a few figures often means an acknowledgement. OP sort of gave up any real claim when he left the lab unless his name is on the proposal, grant, etc. Otherwise, he has no real evidence he was ever involved in the project. The PI's name is likely the one on the IRB proposal, on the grant proposal(s), etc., which is where the authority to assign authors essentially derives from (i.e., documentation that s/he is the actual PI of the project). If the OP were to challenge anything, it would come back to hard documentation. At this point, the OP isn't even in the PI's lab, so there's really not much incentive for the PI to give the OP much credit and the OP has nothing to stand on.

 

[slz1900]

He contributed figures and left the lab. Someone else redid the entire paper. Only a few figures often means an acknowledgement. OP sort of gave up any real claim when he left the lab unless his name is on the proposal, grant, etc. Otherwise, he has no real evidence he was ever involved in the project. The PI's name is likely the one on the IRB proposal, on the grant proposal(s), etc., which is where the authority to assign authors essentially derives from (i.e., documentation that s/he is the actual PI of the project). If the OP were to challenge anything, it would come back to hard documentation. At this point, the OP isn't even in the PI's lab, so there's really not much incentive for the PI to give the OP much credit and the OP has nothing to stand on.

Sure, the PI could do all kinds of spiteful things, but the OP isn't lucky that his former boss is giving him credit he deserves. Leaving a lab also doesn't mean that you don't deserve authorship if the publication is based on your findings, and receiving authorship on a publication that's from a place you no longer work at is very routine. OP did the data collection and contributed 60% of the figures, and 4th author behind a high school student would kind of sting.

To the bolded, it doesn't work that way.

 

[loungebunny]

He contributed figures and left the lab. Someone else redid the entire paper. Only a few figures often means an acknowledgement. OP sort of gave up any real claim when he left the lab unless his name is on the proposal, grant, etc. Otherwise, he has no real evidence he was ever involved in the project. The PI's name is likely the one on the IRB proposal, on the grant proposal(s), etc., which is where the authority to assign authors essentially derives from (i.e., documentation that s/he is the actual PI of the project). If the OP were to challenge anything, it would come back to hard documentation. At this point, the OP isn't even in the PI's lab, so there's really not much incentive for the PI to give the OP much credit and the OP has nothing to stand on.

To clarify on your point, the results section of the paper has not been changed. The 2 figures have been changed (I guess to better project the findings), but the numbers/interpretation has remained the same. Only one person has worked on this paper after I left the lab.

 

[music2doc]

Sure, the PI could do all kinds of spiteful things, but the OP isn't lucky that his former boss is giving him credit he deserves. Leaving a lab also doesn't mean that you don't deserve authorship if the publication is based on your findings, and receiving authorship on a publication that's from a place you no longer work at is very routine. OP did the data collection and contributed 60% of the figures, and 4th author behind a high school student would kind of sting.

To the bolded, it doesn't work that way.

What do you think acknowledgements are for? They acknowledge work done -- i.e., a minor contribution. If all you put in were some figures and you haven't been involved in the project in a couple years or whatever, you probably shouldn't expect much for credit. I certainly wouldn't. I suppose you could be an a**hat and demand they remove your work. I agree the OP deserves an author spot but to think that someone who rewrote the paper, etc. deserves a lower spot than you, not gonna happen. The HS student who supposedly only ran PCRs being in a higher position seems a bit suspect but then we're hearing one side of the story. I tend to take that for what ti is -- one side of the story and probably not the PI's side.

 

[music2doc]

To clarify on your point, the results section of the paper has not been changed. The 2 figures have been changed (I guess to better project the findings), but the numbers/interpretation has remained the same. Only one person has worked on this paper after I left the lab.

Nevermind, misread. If all they did was rewrite the discussion, you might want to take that to the PI, but if your relationship w/ him/her is already on rocky ground, you might want to cut your losses or at least walk on eggshells here

 

[deleted393595]

Did anyone have problem with this?

I was in a lab for a few years and produced considerable amount of data. I left the lab (not exactly in good terms with the P.I.) when the manuscript for the paper was finished.

Long story short, this paper has been worked upon by someone else, and now only 3 of my figures are left in the final manuscript (3 out of 5 total figures). The funny thing is, I've been bumped from first to FOURTH author on this paper. It seems like some summer high school student (who did a few PCRs) is going to end up in front of me.😡😡😡 It seems like P.I. is doing everything in his power to make me suffer!!

This lab is in a reputable school. Does anyone know how to approach this problem??

1) You didn't write the paper, so you don't get 1st author. Unless if the manuscript was yours, you should maybe have gotten 2nd author since whoever came after you would have had to do all of the revisions and stuff.

2) Coming up with figures isn't really that impressive. Even my 5 year old cousin could do it. Putting together the theory and being able to explain your results in context of much larger things and in relationship to other effects is much more important.

 

[mimelim]

I'm not sure you why you are fixated on the number of figures or who created them. They are completely meaningless for assigning authorship. The real question is who designed the experiments and was the creative brains behind it. If you wanted credit for the paper you should have published the paper. Without the other people working on it and getting it published, you wouldn't have a publication at all. You really aren't in a position to argue.

 

[Aerus]

Authorship traditionally is only given to those who provided intellectual contributions. Gathering data does not really merit authorship, although it seems authorship is being handed out more easily nowadays. I would just be thankful that authorship was even given.

 

[IslandStyle808]

This is what a lot of people who don't realize that authorship and roles played in a project have to be discussed BEFORE hand. It does not guarantee what authorship one will get but it will most likely prevent someone from being screwed over.

Theoretically the person who contributed the most intellectually to the project is suppose to get first author. However, there are people who do more grunt work and end up first author. The PI is not suppose to do this but does this anyway to be nice. The PI can screw you over (not saying the majority are like that) if you don't talk about the project and paper before hand.

People would know how to deal with these disputes better if they actually took a good research ethics course (and I mean take an active part in the course).

 

[911 Turbo]

1) You didn't write the paper, so you don't get 1st author. Unless if the manuscript was yours, you should maybe have gotten 2nd author since whoever came after you would have had to do all of the revisions and stuff.

2) Coming up with figures isn't really that impressive. Even my 5 year old cousin could do it. Putting together the theory and being able to explain your results in context of much larger things and in relationship to other effects is much more important.

when op says he came up with the figures he probably means he did all the research/bench work for the figures...


u got screwed OP. i really disagree with the people on here saying that you are "lucky" you are even included. doing the actual experimentation could have taken literally 200x more time than writing a paper.

and the summer high school pcr slave shouldnt have been put ahead of you




im saying all of this assuming you did a large chunk of experimentation and intellectually contributed to the study in some way.

 

[911 Turbo]

This is what a lot of people who don't realize that authorship and roles played in a project have to be discussed BEFORE hand. It does not guarantee what authorship one will get but it will most likely prevent someone from being screwed over.

Theoretically the person who contributed the most intellectually to the project is suppose to get first author. However, there are people who do more grunt work and end up first author. The PI is not suppose to do this but does this anyway to be nice. The PI can screw you over (not saying the majority are like that) if you don't talk about the project and paper before hand.

People would know how to deal with these disputes better if they actually took a good research ethics course (and I mean take an active part in the course).

yep