I need your opinion regarding authorship

[Treg]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hey guys,

I am in the process of preparing a manuscript for publication. The experiments in it are completely of my own design, and luckily I have some really good data that should get me into a good journal. My dilemma is this-the only people who have contributed to this work intellectually are myself and my supervisor. I have done all of the experiments myself, figured out the assays, techniques, etc. myself. I will most certainly be first author, but my boss is now discussing 1-4 other investigators around campus as coauthors, for the following reasons.

1)new PI, needs papers, gave me the cells that I am using with an MTA. Has no idea what I am doing with them.

2-3)"famous" PIs in our group that would see coauthorship as goodwill and may carry weight in getting into a big journal. No idea about what I have done, even remotely. Know me as an acquaintance.

4)a grad student who is a good friend of mine in the lab, who has no funding, and could use a coauthored paper for fellowship applications in the future. A good friend, so this is a sticky situation.

Now, I am in the later half of my PhD after toiling away for a few years on transgenic mice, and I have no papers from grad work. My boss never made it a priority for me to get pubs here, and now things are going great mostly because I changed the focus of my work (through my own hypotheses, etc.).

Do you think that having more coauthors will discredit my contribution, or should I just go with the flow? I am really feeling uneasy about this. The other consideration is that I really, really want to continue my career at this university, and it could help me in the long run (I think). Or is my boss just kissing a little you-know-what at my expense?

Any advice would really be appreciated.

Thanks-🙁

 

[MacGyver]

Originally posted by Treg

I am in the process of preparing a manuscript for publication. The experiments in it are completely of my own design, and luckily I have some really good data that should get me into a good journal.

congratulations

My dilemma is this-the only people who have contributed to this work intellectually are myself and my supervisor.

OK, only you and your supervisor should be listed as authors then.

I have done all of the experiments myself, figured out the assays, techniques, etc. myself. I will most certainly be first author, but my boss is now discussing 1-4 other investigators around campus as coauthors, for the following reasons.

sounds like BS to me.

1)new PI, needs papers, gave me the cells that I am using with an MTA. Has no idea what I am doing with them.

He doesnt deserve authorship. Put him in the acknowledgements section, but clearly no authorship is deserved.

2-3)"famous" PIs in our group that would see coauthorship as goodwill and may carry weight in getting into a big journal. No idea about what I have done, even remotely. Know me as an acquaintance.

Absolutely in no way should they get authorship. Thats scientific fraud to list people who had no real contribution to the work.

4)a grad student who is a good friend of mine in the lab, who has no funding, and could use a coauthored paper for fellowship applications in the future. A good friend, so this is a sticky situation.

No, he shouldnt get it either.

Do you think that having more coauthors will discredit my contribution, or should I just go with the flow?

Uhh.. tough question. I dont think you should do it. Not beccause it will discredit you, but because these people didnt contribute!

You deserve all the acclaim and praise, not any of them.

I am really feeling uneasy about this. The other consideration is that I really, really want to continue my career at this university, and it could help me in the long run (I think).

I dont think it will help you to put them in. How many papers did the big shot PIs offer to put you in? Have they been doing you similiar favors previously? If not, then screw them.

 

[pathdr2b]

Originally posted by MacGyver
I dont think it will help you to put them in. How many papers did the big shot PIs offer to put you in? Have they been doing you similiar favors previously? If not, then screw them.

Putting these folks on your paper may not help, but having this kind of attitude about what I see as common practice in research,
won't keep you in the "game" for long.

I'm of the opinion that as long my name is listed as first author and assuming that the reputation of the other folks you plan to add is solid, I couldn't care less who else got their name on it too within reason, of course. However, hooking up a lab mate is DEFINITELY out of the question. It's partly the PI's responsibility to make sure ALL of her/his students are engaged in publishable work.

 

[Runtita]

Originally posted by MacGyver
Absolutely in no way should they get authorship. Thats scientific fraud to list people who had no real contribution to the work.

I'm with MacGyver on this one. Only people who contributed to the work should get authorship.

Sample Policies:
Harvard Medical Center
UTMB

 

[EvoDevo]

I agree with MacGyver as well. Especially with regard to the other grad student. Handing out favors is BS.

 

[Ceremony]

I know hindsight is 20/20 but I've found that discussing publishing issues early on is key to not having these kinds of issues later. I don't think any of those ppl should be on your paper, even though I think generosity is important in handing out credit. For example, were there any technicians that helped you complete some of the work? My PI and I put down the techs that helped with the work. There are criteria to getting an authorship on a paper. The authors should have made intellectual and technical contributions to the paper. Also, they should have helped you with figures and actually writing the paper as well. It sounds to me like these "authors" did no such thing, so it is not unreasonable for you to discuss this with your PI and say, "Hey look, I want to be generous, but they did not make substantial contributions to the work." Maybe they can be placed in the acknowledgements? The PI who gave you the cells should certainly be acknowledged for giving you the material. Hope this helps resolve your quandary.

 

[xanthines]

the only person that remotely deserves to be on your paper is the guy who gave you the cells. What kind of work was involved to create these cells? Are they stable transfectants of a DN (dominant-negative) mutant in a very-difficult-to-transfect celltype? Are they double, triple, etc transfectants? Are these cells exclusive to the person from who you obtained them?

basically, were these cells essential to your work and if so, were they available elsewhere? If your answers are yes, no then I would probably list him as an author just out of generosity.

If they were plain old NIH3T3 cells or something like that, then forget about.

As for everyone else, they should get their asses into the lab if they want papers. Unless they contributed financially to your project. then they might have a case. But it doesn't sound like it.

-X

 

[Fritz]

Welcome to the world of research!
Other people getting their name in where it does not belong is common practice.
There is a huge difference between what should happen and what it is actually happening in the world of authorship of papers.
I'll just give you an example of what happened to me. I am an RA in the lab, and the project was mostly my idea. I started it, I worked on it really hard and I managed to complete the work in a relatively short period of time. My PI wrote the manuscript and then when it was to be published a zillion people found a way to put their name on our paper. Neither me or my PI were listed as first authors, which really upset me. But I got a nice bonus for my work from the company, so this kinda made me feel better.
Authorship of papers is never fair.

 

[pathdr2b]

Originally posted by Fritz
Neither me or my PI were listed as first authors, which really upset me. But I got a nice bonus for my work from the company, so this kinda made me feel better.

I'm afraid I would have gone to to someone higher on the food chain about this. It's one thing to tolerate this in grdauate school(really, what choice do you have?), but it's completely different in the "real" world.

Originally posted by Fritz
Authorship of papers is never fair.

Ahhhh, the voice of reality speaks

 

[doc05]

the PI who gave you the cells should be listed if he created them (stable transfectant/etc.)

The famous PI's probably don't deserve authorship, but did they have any part in preparing cell lines, dna constructs, etc, etc, (even if the work was done years ago) which you used in your work? In that case authorship may be appropriate. many places list dept chairs/etc. on every paper. All the better if it gets you into a big-name journal -- often politics is the main reason why a paper does/does not make journals like cell, nature, etc.

the grad student deserves no recognition whatsoever. but if he is a friend, why not have him do 1-2 simple experimens, and then include him.

don't expect authorship issues to be fair.

 

[Treg]

Here's an update-

The cells were developed from mice by a PI at another institution and obtained by the PI here through MTA. Then he MTA'd the cells to me, if that makes sense.

I discussed it with my boss and I think that things are cleared up. The PI who provided the cells, as well as two PIs that provided an apparatus, and a critical reagent, respectively, will also be included. I talked to another PI in my dept who said that often when "old farts" are included as authors, people recognize the type of contribution they make.

As for the student, we have helped each other in good will on many occasions, so I told my boss that as long as things are completely consistent across the board (i.e. I am on his/her papers), then that is fine with me. We talked a bit about it amongst ourselves and agreed that it would be helpful to both of us.

These issues are complex and often defy the institutional directive many of us look to. I really appreciate everyone's opinion, and think that the members of this forum are an honest and altruitic cohort (science needs more of these!).

Take care-🙁

PS-got major flu today and barfed at work. Yummy.

 

[xanthines]

This has no relevance to the thread, but just out of curiosity, did you get the flu shot?

My girlfriend is the flu epidemiologist in my state. 🙂

-X

Originally posted by Treg
PS-got major flu today and barfed at work. Yummy.

 

[Treg]

No flu shots for me. Here they don't encourage "healthy" adults to get them. Besides that, I hate having the sore arm all week🙂