Mar 9, 2015
MD/PhD Student

I have worked now for two years in a basic neuroscience research lab and we wanted to publish my data very soon with me as a first author. (Aimed journal: ~ 3,5 IF)

Now we got the offer from one of our collaborating labs to make a joint publication, they will add roughly equal data to the paper. However the authorship will get split in two co-first authorships. I dont know if my name will be first or second.
With their data the paper will provide well rounded data, however we cannot make a big jump in the journal (if we get lucky we can get into ~ 6 IF journal but it is very likely that we will publish it in the same journal with 3,5 IF).

Obviously if we provide a well rounded paper with more data it will get cited more frequently. (h-index etc..) However maybe at the cost that i will not be first in the list of the authors. (But for sure co-first author).

It's my decision to make... should i go for it?
I would appreciate every opinion!

Btw... I have to decide tomorrow. I personally tend to share the first authorship since citations are the more important thing in the long term run...
Last edited:


5+ Year Member
Jan 20, 2014
Medical Student
Just my n = 1 opinion, but you are allowed to be selfish. I would publish the paper and move on to the next project as quickly as you can. How long would it logistically take to incorporate the data into your figures and paper? Things always take longer than they seem.

Who made the decision for this to be co-authorship? If you came up with the hypothesis, carried out the methods, drew up the figures, drafted the paper - and all they are doing is sharing data, seems like you have a lot to argue for sole first authorship. But, that is often never a student's decision to make.

Can't really go wrong here, good luck.
  • Like
Reactions: tom_austria