Publications

[unnamedlord]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I have been doing research for quite some time now and I helped develop my own project and justified it though before that I was working on a project designed by someone else. What frustrates me is that undergrads and even some grad students get published as first authors for a project they did not come up with and for developing barely any of the methods.

I have seen many undergrads who don't know the real detailed rationality behind what they are doing till they actually start writing a paper or present a powerpoint. Many of them barely come up with their own protocols or methods. Technically, if the only contribution you made to a project was carrying out the protocols and essentially being a data collector then you should not even be published. But then tenured prof who want to see their students thrive end up giving them first authorship.

Honestly, I don't think that the undergrad level publications should have any significance cause it is all luck for most students. But then how should med shcls differentiate those who came up with the idea or were involved in providing a substantial amount of discussion from those who should just be acknowledged in the paper. Should they call the PI up and say whose idea was it and so on but I don't think they have enough time.

 

[saveourpens]

Grad students need pubs to graduate. You need pubs to boost your application.

 

[911 Turbo]

I have been doing research for quite some time now and I helped develop my own project and justified it though before that I was working on a project designed by someone else. What frustrates me is that undergrads and even some grad students get published as first authors for a project they did not come up with and for developing barely any of the methods.

I have seen many undergrads who don't know the real detailed rationality behind what they are doing till they actually start writing a paper or present a powerpoint. Many of them barely come up with their own protocols or methods. Technically, if the only contribution you made to a project was carrying out the protocols and essentially being a data collector then you should not even be published. But then tenured prof who want to see their students thrive end up giving them first authorship.

Honestly, I don't think that the undergrad level publications should have any significance cause it is all luck for most students. But then how should med shcls differentiate those who came up with the idea or were involved in providing a substantial amount of discussion from those who should just be acknowledged in the paper. Should they call the PI up and say whose idea was it and so on but I don't think they have enough time.

ROFL..... what about the undergrads who lived in the lab and worked 50/50 research and coursework?

Don't worry.... I hear adcoms see through fake research scut work very easily.

 

[ILuvScience]

Ha! I was in the lab 8 hrs a day Monday-friday for eight weeks! I worked my butt off!


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile app

 

[RocketSurgeon]

I have 8 journal publications (that im proud of) and then others and ive worked my way up over the years. I've seep both sides I have spent months working on projects where I was just acknowledged in the paper and then ive had publications where I really didnt do all that much and got an authorship.

I understand your concern but the idea is only one leg of research. Carrying out experiments is a big part. Following through, interpreting results, tweaking experiments is a significant part as well and I believe work done running and designing experiments warrants an authorship. Some times you can land an authorship because you had a unique skill set. I've been in situation where I had the skill set to perform more complicated analysis than anyone in the lab and so even though what I contributed to the project took only a few weeks, my work greatly aided the interpretation of the results.

In summary, research is about collaboration. The requisite for an authorship is that you must have contributed to the research finding. As you work on more complicated projects you will realize that sometimes one person can only know so much so its not always feasible that all authors have complete knowledge of all parts of the study.

 

[unnamedlord]

@ ILuvScience 8 hours a day for 8 weeks is nothing. Also, that would count towards your research exp. It does not necessarily mean you get a publication.

@Venom5 I know of undergrads who lived in the lab and basically did the protocol the PI or a grad student came up with for a project the PI came up with. This is common esp in big labs. Again, the hours you spend on a project does not guarantee you first authorship or even any authorship. Maybe an acknowledgement. You can get a recc from PI who can tell the med schls how hard working you are but you don't get to get a publication by ethical standards for just following what your PI or grad student tells u to do.

@RocketSurgeon Are you a non-trad or in comp sc/theoretical physics? 8 pub is a lot for a trad. My lab collaborates with many researchers and I'm well aware of this. The contribution to the research finding should be on the order of coming up with the idea/designing experiments/significantly modifying them/significant discussion and interpretation of data that guarantees more than an acknowledgement. Technically, lab techs who only collect data are not supposed to be given authorship, unless they had a significant role in the research. If you make a program specifically for the study, then you may get authorship. If you made a program for general use or unspecifically for the study, then you may get acknowledged but your program must be mentioned in the study.

 

[ILuvScience]

Ummm I did get published sweetheart : ). It was research in the Pharmacology field.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile app

 

[ILuvScience]

I'm sorry you're upset with your current situation but don't knock others' achievements.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile app

 

[unnamedlord]

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.or...articles/2001_03_30/noDOI.9203462371499238483

Check paragraph number 4. For a lab tech to be published, he/she must have significant contributions other than simply doing as planned by someone else.

 

[unnamedlord]

@ILuvScience: good for you.Oh and authorship is an important ethical dilemma.