How to get publications?

[Meliora]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hello
I was wondering how one can publish a paper on a project or be added as an author for a project in a lab you are working in? I have been working on a project for a long time and am not sure if I should ask about publishing


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Endoxifen]

Hello
I was wondering how one can publish a paper on a project or be added as an author for a project in a lab you are working in? I have been working on a project for a long time and am not sure if I should ask about publishing


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

This is something you need to talk with you PI about. Bench publications are massive endeavors with up to 20 figures (including supplemental) which all need to be up to a certain quality. It's entirely possible that you aren't anywhere near close to publishing. You need to have a conversation with you PI to see what his expectations of the project are and how far along until the project is completed. If you're working under a grad student or a post-doc, then you should also talk with them.

 

[aldol16]

Talk to the graduate student or post-doc you are working with who is in charge of the project. They should have a rough time frame for when they envision completing the project and publishing the results. How long a publication takes per project is highly field-dependent. In some fields, you can churn out papers every few months. In other fields, a project might take two or more years to complete.

 

[DoctorCakes]

I worked in a lab for two summers full time and made the foolish mistake of not pursuing to be included in the research paper. The PI did not include my name in their paper. I feel like that time was lost. Don't make the mistake I did.

 

[Spr1ngrolls]

Get in to a lab, start scrubbing some test tubes. Start small, commit so that your presence is not negligible, and work hard. And as above, have a conversation with whoever you're working with. I did and I'm in the process of pushing out two publications right now right after graduation.

 

[bannie22]

if u are paid i wouldnt expect name on the paper for grunt work that a monkey could otherwise do. acknowledgements seems to be the more appropriate place. i think u wud have to rank up in the world and contribute meaningfully before someone would consider putting your name on the paper.

 

[ChymeofPassion]

Ive never worked under a grad student or post doc so idk how to navigate that political spectrum, but what I did was simply ask my PI "do you think we have enough data to begin thinking about publishing". Once you know the paper is being written, advocate for yourself. If you contributed unique ideas to the project, you will be published. If you're counting cells and making media all day, dont expect anything.

 

[Yorick]

It varies a lot, some PIs will put people on papers even if they barely contribute anything, others will only do so if they contributed ideas and carried out experiments resulting in data that will be put on the paper. Talk to your lab colleagues.

 

[Shirafune]

For ideal requirements for authorship, see: ICMJE | Recommendations | Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors

The relevant bits:

"The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:

• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
• Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
• Final approval of the version to be published; AND
• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved."

"Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged"
​

In reality, all authors almost never meet all the criteria listed above. PIs may tack on colleagues who only advised for 15 minutes. For undergrads, it largely depends on your PI and your supervisor. You can only increase your chances by actively participating in the research (i.e. intellectual contribution) which typically involves designing experiments to challenge a model/hypothesis. Students are not likely involved with manuscript preparation unless they are first or second author. 3rd and 4th points are always a given when submitting a manuscript for publication.

For undergrads, I would boil down authorship to:

(1) Do you know your publishable contributions to the manuscript inside and out? (What)
(2) Can you describe the rationale for each experiment you conducted? (Why)
(3) Did you have input in the design of experiments (which goes beyond optimizing antibody concentrations for Western blots for example)? Or did you merely follow instructions? (How)
(4) Did you interpret data you collected, as in how do these results support or refute your model? (What it means)

In my experience, undergrads do not have a good enough grasp of the project to warrant authorship. If you can't understand the project, there's no way you were able to design the project. Of course, some PIs will be nice enough to just tack you on, so YMMV, but this all starts with communication with your PI/supervisor. And as always, be polite when discussing potential authorship and have a realistic understanding of your contributions. There's nothing more annoying for a seasoned researcher to hear than a newbie asking for publication just because they could follow orders.

 

[vellez]

My advice (it may be too late) is to work with a newer, younger prof. It may seem smart to work with the older, established prof with sexy research, but if it's a large lab, you're probably never even gonna see that prof. Plus, adcoms see publishing/papers as an understand if the scientific process--that's just as important (if not more) than the content of the paper itself. So maybe it won't be the sexiest of topics, but you'll get a paper out of it, and show the adcom you understand the research process/communication/statistics. Nothing an undergrad is gonna be groundbreaking research, FYI. If it were, you'd best to believe the grad student/Post doc/prof would be ALL over taking credit for it.

When I was looking for a lab, I went for the smallest, newest one. And I was able to develop a great relationship with the prof, who was new and young. He was really about being inclusive. I think younger profs may be better for that.