How many first author pubs do you need to graduate?

[devildoc2]

I know its not that cut and dry, but dont grad schools/thesis councils have some kind of rule of thumb when deciding whether or not you should graduate?

For example I doubt they would let you graduate with just one first author pub in a very poor quality journal.

But whats typical? 3, 4, 5?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Gfunk6]

Not only is it school dependent, but it is department dependent. At my school and deparment, they required three first-author publications or five years in a PhD, whichever comes first.

 

[huseyin]

I know its not that cut and dry, but dont grad schools/thesis councils have some kind of rule of thumb when deciding whether or not you should graduate?

For example I doubt they would let you graduate with just one first author pub in a very poor quality journal.

But whats typical? 3, 4, 5?

wow!!!! 3 is a lot. I know some MSTP students who did not have 1st author during their PhD and they are hoping to graduate.

 

[dr.z]

I've seen people graduate without any. I thought it was typically 1 or 2, and it really depends on where you go too (of course more the better).

 

[Doctor&Geek]

Quality of publication should matter, too. 3 BBRC do not equate to one Cell.

 

[b&ierstiefel]

it all depends on the department and your thesis committee. here, the minimum was considered 3 first author pubs in any journal as long as it was solid work. you may be forced to publish in BBRC or some crappy journal because you got scooped but that should not negate your work in any way in the eyes of the committee...and it usually doesn't.

 

[huseyin]

it all depends on the department and your thesis committee. here, the minimum was considered 3 first author pubs in any journal as long as it was solid work. you may be forced to publish in BBRC or some crappy journal because you got scooped but that should not negate your work in any way in the eyes of the committee...and it usually doesn't.

What is wrong with BBRC?

 

[b&ierstiefel]

What is wrong with BBRC?

it's just not perceived as a first-class journal. low impact factor. no comparison to the JBC tier, JCB/MCB tier, or the Cell/Science/Nature tier.

 

[mdphd2b]

I know its not that cut and dry, but dont grad schools/thesis councils have some kind of rule of thumb when deciding whether or not you should graduate?

For example I doubt they would let you graduate with just one first author pub in a very poor quality journal.

But whats typical? 3, 4, 5?

Hi,

I'm in my 3rd year of PhD at Pitt's MSTP.

Here at Pitt it is definitely multifactorial. The expectations for pubs vary by departments and the make-up of one's thesis committee. Ultimately, your PhD is a contract between you and your PI. Students in my lab have traditionally gotten out with 2 first author pubs, and this was what I was told.

This is a major reason why the majority of MSTP students at Pitt take 4+ years for their PhD. We may have accumulated enough disssertation credits to graduate (min 40), but most thesis commitees are not satisfied until we have first-author pubs.

Soneone once said that easing the PhD requirements for us MSTP students would "dilute the quality of our graduate program".

 

[gizzard]

Quality of publication should matter, too. 3 BBRC do not equate to one Cell.

One Cell does not necessarily equate quality either. Are you referring to quality of the journal or quality of the work?

 

[Treg]

I am in a straight PhD program. Here we need three first-authored pubs to graduate, although technically only one has to be accepted to defend your thesis. I have one accepted, one about 90% written, and for my third the data is all there, it just has to be written. I am defending at the end of June, so my thesis has to be in by early May

Treg

 

[Logos']

..

 

[BDavis]

I know its not that cut and dry, but dont grad schools/thesis councils have some kind of rule of thumb when deciding whether or not you should graduate?

For example I doubt they would let you graduate with just one first author pub in a very poor quality journal.

But whats typical? 3, 4, 5?

At Baylor we need between 1-3 first author publications depending on the length (for ex. article vs. brief letter), journal quality, and the general impression of how much work you have done (which is variable based on your committee and thesis advisor). Personally for me, I had to have two first authors accepted and one submitted; and 1 second author to get permission (no reviews for me). Some of the thesis committees seems to relax the "at least two first author requirement" if the Ph.D. is taking more than 6 years. There seems to be almost an inverse relationship between how many papers you need to have with how long your Ph.D. has been. I have seen MSTP students graduate in 4 years with 3 first author papers/2 reviews and other graduate in 6/7 years with just 1 first author paper. The average here seems to be 6 years for the Ph.D. with 1-2 first author papers.

 

[b&ierstiefel]

At Baylor we need between 1-3 first author publications depending on the length (for ex. article vs. brief letter), journal quality, and the general impression of how much work you have done (which is variable based on your committee and thesis advisor). Personally for me, I had to have two first authors accepted and one submitted; and 1 second author to get permission (no reviews for me). Some of the thesis committees seems to relax the "at least two first author requirement" if the Ph.D. is taking more than 6 years. There seems to be almost an inverse relationship between how many papers you need to have with how long your Ph.D. has been. I have seen MSTP students graduate in 4 years with 3 first author papers/2 reviews and other graduate in 6/7 years with just 1 first author paper. The average here seems to be 6 years for the Ph.D. with 1-2 first author papers.

Same case at our institution. However, here I know of a few folks who had one first author pub and spent 4 years in the PhD. I dunno if they had more stuff submitted. But they're having a great ol' time in the wards ...I bet they miss grad school.

 

[Joel Fleischman]

our rule of thumb is 3, but I got out with 2 cuz my first one was substantial enough.
We had people who were around for 5+ and got the "OK you can go now thing" with <3 pubs...
just depends

 

[Vader]

We have no official publication requirement. The amount of work considered worthy of a thesis is determined by the thesis committee. Most students end up graduating with at least a few publications because the amount of work they do ends up being sufficient for at least that number.

While I realize this may be unconventional, I look at the publications as incidental to (or perhaps supportive of) your actual work done during the thesis. Getting work published in a scientific journal is not a simple matter of quality or amount of work done. There are politics involved, a judgement by the editor whether your paper is a "sexy" topic, the issue of having a "complete story" with mechanistic insight versus "descriptive" work, and many others. Faculty on committees (should) realize the reality of this. So if you have done solid work that they feel merits the PhD, then that is all you need. In fact, there have been a couple of cases in our program in which a student graduated without any publications. Of course, it is probably much easier to convince your thesis committee that it is time to move on if you can tell them you have already published your work in a number of papers.

 

[Habari]

We have no official publication requirement. The amount of work considered worthy of a thesis is determined by the thesis committee. Most students end up graduating with at least a few publications because the amount of work they do ends up being sufficient for at least that number.

While I realize this may be unconventional, I look at the publications as incidental to (or perhaps supportive of) your actual work done during the thesis. Getting work published in a scientific journal is not a simple matter of quality or amount of work done. There are politics involved, a judgement by the editor whether your paper is a "sexy" topic, the issue of having a "complete story" with mechanistic insight versus "descriptive" work, and many others. Faculty on committees (should) realize the reality of this. So if you have done solid work that they feel merits the PhD, then that is all you need. In fact, there have been a couple of cases in our program in which a student graduated without any publications. Of course, it is probably much easier to convince your thesis committee that it is time to move on if you can tell them you have already published your work in a number of papers.

seconded. i think rockefeller operates in the same fashion.

 

[Maebea]

We have no official publication requirement. The amount of work considered worthy of a thesis is determined by the thesis committee. Most students end up graduating with at least a few publications because the amount of work they do ends up being sufficient for at least that number.

While I realize this may be unconventional, I look at the publications as incidental to (or perhaps supportive of) your actual work done during the thesis. Getting work published in a scientific journal is not a simple matter of quality or amount of work done. There are politics involved, a judgement by the editor whether your paper is a "sexy" topic, the issue of having a "complete story" with mechanistic insight versus "descriptive" work, and many others. Faculty on committees (should) realize the reality of this. So if you have done solid work that they feel merits the PhD, then that is all you need. In fact, there have been a couple of cases in our program in which a student graduated without any publications. Of course, it is probably much easier to convince your thesis committee that it is time to move on if you can tell them you have already published your work in a number of papers.

Agreed. The PhD is as much about developing as a scientist as about publishing your work. The former is more important for your long-term prospects. Getting lucky and cranking out a Cell paper one's first year in lab may actually do more harm than good if it leads one to rush through the PhD and shortchanges their development as a scientist. It might not become apparent for 10 or 15 years, but sooner or later it will bite you in the arse. When you are applying for a RO1 grant as an assistant professor, reviewers do not care what you did as a PhD student 10 years before.
I counsel students to find the best mentor rather than focusing on the hottest science, or the lab that grants the quickest PhDs, etc. Choose a mentor who can train you to be a great scientist. The PhD is just a step in your development. Shortchanging yourself at this step can limit your future development as researcher.