Screwed over in research

[BurghStudent]

---

Members don't see this ad.

So I have been working at a lab for almost a year now. A couple of other students and I, one starting when I did, and another much later, have been working on a project for my PI. I find out that I am not on the draft for the paper, and the other two students are. I just don't know how to feel, we always used to split up work, worked as a team. It just gets to you, you kinda lose motivation.

When an opportunity for recognition slips by leaving you in the dust, you feel like you were not worth being recognized. I don't know. I got shafted. Has this happened to anyone else? Also, how do I prevent this on future projects? I don't feel like making any awkwardness between me and my PI, he's my physio teacher until Dec 18th. 🙂

 

[chessknt]

It could be a mistake. Posting about this on a forum isnt going to make you feel better, if you know you worked just as hard as the other two, go talk to your PI about why you arent being recognized. He/she is obviously not trying to steal credit because the other two students are on it, so Im feeling it may have been an oversight.

 

[BurghStudent]

Yeah, I guess you're right. I think I might just talk about with him. I usually find such things awkward, but oh well.

 

[TheMightySmiter]

You don't necessarily have to ask him about it directly. You could meet with him to talk about your role in the lab, and how you're looking for more responsibility. You could then emphasize the work that you have been doing on the current project and why you feel that you've proven yourself capable. That way, you won't sound accusing or anything, but later he might be more likely to remember you when working on the publication.

 

[chessknt]

You don't necessarily have to ask him about it directly. You could meet with him to talk about your role in the lab, and how you're looking for more responsibility. You could then emphasize the work that you have been doing on the current project and why you feel that you've proven yourself capable. That way, you won't sound accusing or anything, but later he might be more likely to remember you when working on the publication.

Disagree completely. Attack the issue head on (tactfully of course--its a discussion not a trial), at least youll have a solid answer by the time youre done.

 

[BurghStudent]

These are great suggestions. At the key time, when he actually mentions this paper to the lab and talks about it (as I heard about the paper from another source), I plan on talking to him.

I simply want to let him know that if the other two are eligible, I should be eligible. If he returns with doubts on my abilities, I am going to ask him to challenge me. Seriously. Challenge me if you want to see my best work. Ask me to be here more often, give me more work, make me accountable.

 

[URHere]

Challenge me if you want to see my best work. Ask me to be here more often, give me more work, make me accountable.

You are an adult, and you need to challenge yourself. If you could be in lab more often, doing better work...then, why aren't you? The more responsibility you take for yourself, the more faith your PI will invest in you. You will benefit in the long run.

Anyway...back on topic. Before you do anything else, I would suggest making an honest comparison between yourself and these other students. Are they in lab more often than you? Did they spend more time on this specific project than you did? Were they involved with analysis or drafting the paper (if you weren't)? If the answer to any of these questions is a "yes", then in my opinion, they probably have more right to be included on the paper than you do. On the other hand, if you can honestly say that your contribution was equal to theirs, then approach you PI and ask if he is planning to include you on this paper. Asking is about all you can do. Sometimes science sucks and sometimes it seems like luck is never on your side. It's just a fact of life.

 

[Frodo7]

On the other hand, if you can honestly say that your contribution was equal to theirs, then approach you PI and ask if he is planning to include you on this paper.

Exactly. If you're getting pushed around now, what do you think is going to happen in 20 years?

 

[JJMrK]

How much time per week did you spend on this project?

 

[BurghStudent]

Honestly, honestly, we three would all work 10 hours a week. Not much, but the project was such, work had to be divided like that. I am not aware of any contribution they made to the paper that was actually writing a section or something similar. My PI must have approached them from early on, of which I wasn't aware, and planned it from then. I guess I got bumped off- and I didn't know it until now.

I definitely have to bring it up to him, now way out of it. I just want to know what I did that was lacking.

 

[rockymhs]

Honestly, honestly, we three would all work 10 hours a week. Not much, but the project was such, work had to be divided like that. I am not aware of any contribution they made to the paper that was actually writing a section or something similar. My PI must have approached them from early on, of which I wasn't aware, and planned it from then. I guess I got bumped off- and I didn't know it until now.

I definitely have to bring it up to him, now way out of it. I just want to know what I did that was lacking.

You got to be proactive about your situation in lab.

If you only do work that you are told to do such as dish washing and reagent prep and such, you are not going to get actual research experience.

On top of doing your work, you have to ask your PI for possible involvements in actual research, and also ask graduate students or postdocs about shadowing them with their research.

Even in my lab, there are so many undergraduates that some are doing mostly simple chores. But some are doing research work because they specifically asked for it continuously when opportunities arise.

 

[BurghStudent]

I see what you are saying. However, we were all trained on what we had to do. We all did the same stuff, data collection, basically, recognizing and labeling neurons.


I have a feeling it has something to do with his physio class. The other two students have taken it, and I am taking it now. He has high regard for his class, so maybe he didn't fully trust me yet.

But yes, I will look into doing that more. Thanks for the help.

 

[randombetch]

Honestly, honestly, we three would all work 10 hours a week. Not much, but the project was such, work had to be divided like that. I am not aware of any contribution they made to the paper that was actually writing a section or something similar. My PI must have approached them from early on, of which I wasn't aware, and planned it from then. I guess I got bumped off- and I didn't know it until now.

I definitely have to bring it up to him, now way out of it. I just want to know what I did that was lacking.

You don't have to have written anything on a paper to be a co-author. The main requirement is an intellectual contribution. What did you contribute to the paper yourself? Did you do anything along the lines of contributing intellectual insight for the paper? If you only did scut work - that's not worthy of authorship, even if others are on it who started around the same time you did.

 

[BurghStudent]

I did the exact same work as everyone of the project. We all did data collection. None of us thought up the immunohistochemistry, none of us decided which peptide to explore, none of us came up with the project. We all collected data, simple. If we all collected data, then by the definition yo give, none of us should be on the paper, something I would be perfectly cool about. But, just them and not me, makes me wonder. Even if what they did doesn't warrant authorship - it did, so...

 

[sgtbrushes]

If you have been working with/ for your PI for long enough, it shouldn't be a big deal to flat out bring it up. "Excuse me sir, do you have a minute to talk?" (If he says yes), "I see that Jake and Elwood are on here, but I am not. Would you mind giving me some pointers on how to work better in the lab?" or some such comment.

 

[ShinyDome19]

Before talking to the PI, I would check and see if he/she put you in the acknowledgements section. If so, then the PI had put some thought into the work you contributed to the paper and had some reasoning behind not putting you as an author. You could then ask him/her about how you could take on more responsibilities so that the next paper you can be an author. If your not even being acknowledged, then its possible they just made a mistake...And, if you go and talk to them, and they say well, I didnt think you contributed enough to be an author..or whatever, you can atleast ask to be put in the acknowledgements section; not that being acknowledged holds any weight..but its better than nothing. And, honestly, it doesnt really mean anything for the PI to add another author. If he/she likes you and you do good work and they arnt a jerk, I am sure they will put you on it just to keep the peace. The lab I work in now uses authorship spots (non-first and last author) to just keep good relationships with neighboring lab members who throw us a bone periodically...its a smart thing to do.

I do know from personal experience, that when you have a bunch of undergrads in a lab working for you/with you, and you go to write a paper, it gets difficult to remember who did what and ultimately who is deserving of authorship or acknowledgement, especially on large projects that take a long time to complete.

You'd be supprised how often this stuff happens though..Actually happened to me twice during my 2.5 years in graduate school. I once did 8 months of sequencing work, ~5 days a week, for a fellow graduate student who was writing their dissertation, which put back my personal research because they didnt know how to do sequencing or have the time to learn it. The paper they were working on had been originally been rejected due to no sequencing, which was something I had pretty much mastered, so I did it to help them out because they couldnt graduate until the paper was accepted. I wasnt expecting anything in return for the work, but it would have been nice. I ended up not even getting acknowledged though... So, I feel your pain. Good Luck talking to your PI.

 

[bannie22]

Hi PI, may I know why I wasnt on the paper even though I put in a fair share of the work?

 

[randombetch]

I did the exact same work as everyone of the project. We all did data collection. None of us thought up the immunohistochemistry, none of us decided which peptide to explore, none of us came up with the project. We all collected data, simple. If we all collected data, then by the definition yo give, none of us should be on the paper, something I would be perfectly cool about. But, just them and not me, makes me wonder. Even if what they did doesn't warrant authorship - it did, so...

Well, I guess your PI just likes them. He has every right to not give you authorship, and every right to give someone else authorship.

 

[strummin]

Well, I guess your PI just likes them. He has every right to not give you authorship, and every right to give someone else authorship.

No he doesn't. If you're working in academia, and your PI does not give you the acknowledgement that you deserve, you CAN fight back. You can go to the head of the department and even the dean if you have to.

Your PI can't steal your work. If you make major/significant contributions to the work, and he refuses to put your name on the paper, then he/she is effectively stealing your work.

It's very rare for a PI to refuse to put someone's name on a paper when they rightfully deserve it. The much more common problem that PI's have is who to put where i.e. first author, second author etc. etc. And esp with graduate students working w/ post-docs, lab fights can easily break out when someone feels "robbed" because he/she is not the first/second name on the paper. This is esp common in large labs with huge group projects.

 

[csmittyB]

I see what you are saying. However, we were all trained on what we had to do. We all did the same stuff, data collection, basically, recognizing and labeling neurons.


I have a feeling it has something to do with his physio class. The other two students have taken it, and I am taking it now. He has high regard for his class, so maybe he didn't fully trust me yet.

But yes, I will look into doing that more. Thanks for the help.

It seems like your PI has an ego. Do you do enough brown nosing? Did the other 2 people spend time stroking his ego? That could be the difference.

 

[BurghStudent]

Thanks for all the insight,

I didn't realize these situations have been common with undergrads, but I guess politics follows you wherever you go.

^You may be right. One of the other students is his TA for the physio class now so that definitely plays a role with who he looks at first.

When he brings up this paper with us (as again, he hasn't yet), I will ask him, and find out how to perform well next time.

 

[randombetch]

No he doesn't. If you're working in academia, and your PI does not give you the acknowledgement that you deserve, you CAN fight back. You can go to the head of the department and even the dean if you have to.

Your PI can't steal your work. If you make major/significant contributions to the work, and he refuses to put your name on the paper, then he/she is effectively stealing your work.

It's very rare for a PI to refuse to put someone's name on a paper when they rightfully deserve it. The much more common problem that PI's have is who to put where i.e. first author, second author etc. etc. And esp with graduate students working w/ post-docs, lab fights can easily break out when someone feels "robbed" because he/she is not the first/second name on the paper. This is esp common in large labs with huge group projects.

Okay, by "you" I was specifically referring to the OP who admits to have done nothing intellectually contributing.

I completely agree with your post - no one should be allowed to steal someone else's ideas. But doing the assays mindlessly should never warrant publication.

 

[175961]

slap your PI around, give him the "WTF!!!!" look. your name will be included promptly......might even be the only one on there after you do that.👍

 

[sunshinevet]

Okay, by "you" I was specifically referring to the OP who admits to have done nothing intellectually contributing.

I completely agree with your post - no one should be allowed to steal someone else's ideas. But doing the assays mindlessly should never warrant publication.

+1👍

I would probably put you guys in the acknowledgements section for helping me out with the data collection... much like I would someone who typed something into an excel spreadsheet for me. But it sounds like you didnt intellectually contribute, and so I dont think you deserve authorship. Maybe the others had conversations with your PI, did extra reading etc that you didn't know about, and were maybe more intellectually involved.

But if its the way it seems, that you all did the same amount of data collection stuff, I would say that its not you deserve to be on it because they are - I think none of you do.

And I know that comes off as really harsh, but its not. I'm sure you're really smart, and know lots about your research 🙂. Just I don't think authorship would be appropriate in this case.

 

[shiftingmirage]

When he brings up this paper with us (as again, he hasn't yet), I will ask him, and find out how to perform well next time.

My understanding is that the paper and the omission of your name, you only know through the grape vine. I would suggest next time you're in the lab, tell the PI 'oh, I did blah blah blah. I was wondering how the project is going. Are the results what we expected? Do you think the work being performed is of a publishable quality?' Or something like that. Ideally your PI would be like, 'yes, results are good, we're hoping to publish in the next few months.' If he says no, then there probably isn't a paper in the works. If he says yes, be like 'that's great, I'm glad I could contribute to the project, and have an impact on the scientific community.'

That way you aren't really being confrontational at all, and you could probably get an answer to your question sooner rather than later.

 

[BurghStudent]

sunshinevet, I agree with you completely. Even I don't think what we did was author worthy. Unless like you said they contributed and I didn't know.

Haha, yeah, kind of put him on the spot. That would be great.

 

[findlife]

You don't necessarily have to ask him about it directly. You could meet with him to talk about your role in the lab, and how you're looking for more responsibility. You could then emphasize the work that you have been doing on the current project and why you feel that you've proven yourself capable. That way, you won't sound accusing or anything, but later he might be more likely to remember you when working on the publication.

Bad idea. I agree with other posters. You need to ask him directly. All authorship disuptes are always settled through direct communication (I'm speaking from experience.) In this case, being vague is not the best way to promote harmony. You should communicate respectably, honestly, and genuinely. Sit your PI down and talk to him. "I've really enjoyed working in your lab, and I'm so thankful for all the experiences. I've had here. [address issue of authorship directly. eg. I was reading the paper and I noticed...]. I just wanted to talk to you about it, since [I put in as much work as everyone else]" Say something like that, but more eloquently.

 

[shiftingmirage]

I did the exact same work as everyone of the project. We all did data collection. None of us thought up the immunohistochemistry, none of us decided which peptide to explore, none of us came up with the project. We all collected data, simple. If we all collected data, then by the definition yo give, none of us should be on the paper, something I would be perfectly cool about. But, just them and not me, makes me wonder. Even if what they did doesn't warrant authorship - it did, so...

Data collection is definitely worthy of a co-authorship, assuming you did a significant amount of the work. So if your lab had 500 data points, and you collected 100 of them, then ya, you deserve to be on the paper. If you collected 10, I would say you still deserve to be on there, but there are PIs out there who would say you didn't contribute enough. I believe if your work is used in the paper, be it a datum point, a theory, a method developed, or composing the paper, you should be a co-author.

I don't know how your lab works, when I did research, we worked with people from across the country. So we would work up the samples, generate the results, and give them to someone else who would write the paper. The projects tend to be very large, so we looked for one thing in a sample, 5 other labs looked for something else. Anyways, turned out my name was omitted of an abstract because the guy writing the thing didn't know I was working on the project, and my PI didn't know the abstract existed until it was already accepted, at which point the journal would not allow you to add authors. My PI said she was sorry, then emailed them saying anything using the results generated from her lab needs to have my name on it as well. A full article was published, and my name was on it. The omission of your name may not be the PIs fault at all.

Talk to the guy. It will be awkward. These convos always are, but once clear dialog is established, it will be better for both of you. There will be no more beating around the bush, everyone will be on the same page, and there will be less problems in the lab. This obviously bothers you as you made the thread, and have been replying. If you're mad because you were omitted, you'll be mad everythime you go to the lab, you'll cop an attitude somewhere, your work will decrease in quality. You can be candid without being rude. Tell the PI, I worked hard, and I think I earned it. If he says no, ask what you need to do next time to warrent a co-authorship.

 

[GellaBella]

Data collection is definitely worthy of a co-authorship, assuming you did a significant amount of the work.

Thats incorrect. Data collection as simple data collection is not worthy of authorship. Data collection WITH analytical interpretation is. There needs to be thought behind it somehow. If you design the experiment and obtain the results you are worthy or some authorship. If you just come in, take a protocol, follow it exactly and then once you have the data someone else takes it and analyzes it...thats not authorship worthy regardless of how much time you spent doing it.

 

[ShinyDome19]

Thats incorrect. Data collection as simple data collection is not worthy of authorship. Data collection WITH analytical interpretation is. There needs to be thought behind it somehow. If you design the experiment and obtain the results you are worthy or some authorship. If you just come in, take a protocol, follow it exactly and then once you have the data someone else takes it and analyzes it...thats not authorship worthy regardless of how much time you spent doing it.

Lol..what? So, no lab tech, who does 100% of the lab work, beit following protocols, with a PI who does all the writing, is not worthy of having their name on the paper...?

if you did something that contributed to a project, that no one else could have done without taking a significant amount of time away from their individual part of the project, then you should be considered for authorship. If your part was fairly insignificant, then you should still be in the acknowledgements.

 

[GellaBella]

A lab tech who does 100% of the work probably has a good grasp on the project and will make a meaningful contribution at some point that then leads to authorship.

I would not give authorship to someone that just follows protocols without contributing anything. I'll thank them in the acknowledgements

 

[ShinyDome19]

I am not sure I understand what you are saying...all lab work, whether you do 100% or 0.00001% of it, requires you to follow protocols...Protocols are there so that your data is reliable and repeatable and so if there are problems, you can troubleshoot them. Saying that a person who just follows protocols isnt deserving of authorship and isnt contributing significantly to a project doesnt make sense.

If the person doesnt follow the protocols, I would say they dont deserve authorship.

In the end it simply comes down to the question: did the person make a significant contribution to the work. But, the concept of what is significant will be different for everybody you come across. Scan the forums and you will see tons of undergrad pre-meds saying they want to join a lab to get published...most of them have no understanding as to how much work goes into getting a single paper submitted, let alone accepted and published. But, I guarantee, that the one semester of "work" they do in the lab makes them all think they are qualified to be authors on any papers that come out.

 

[sustentacular]

Honestly, honestly, we three would all work 10 hours a week. Not much, but the project was such, work had to be divided like that. I am not aware of any contribution they made to the paper that was actually writing a section or something similar. My PI must have approached them from early on, of which I wasn't aware, and planned it from then. I guess I got bumped off- and I didn't know it until now.

I definitely have to bring it up to him, now way out of it. I just want to know what I did that was lacking.

Have you asked the other two about it? Maybe the PI has asked them (or they asked the PI) to write sections outside of their lab time. I'm not as familiar with biomedical research but for papers I've written and projects I've helped with, data collection earns you a mention in the acknowledgments.. not an author position. To me it seems strange that you'd be given an authorship on a paper you didn't even know was being written. But, I agree with you that if you really have done the exact same type and amount of work as the other two you should be included on the paper just as they were.

 

[BurghStudent]

Thanks for the responses.

I don't really know what warrants co-authorship, data collection, " " w/ analysis, or what. But I feel it really ends up depending on the PI. I know that solely he writes the paper, no one else, undegrads/grads write a portion. I will definitely ask the other two student though if he's mentioned anything.

 

[randombetch]

I am not sure I understand what you are saying...all lab work, whether you do 100% or 0.00001% of it, requires you to follow protocols...Protocols are there so that your data is reliable and repeatable and so if there are problems, you can troubleshoot them. Saying that a person who just follows protocols isnt deserving of authorship and isnt contributing significantly to a project doesnt make sense.

If the person doesnt follow the protocols, I would say they dont deserve authorship.

In the end it simply comes down to the question: did the person make a significant contribution to the work. But, the concept of what is significant will be different for everybody you come across. Scan the forums and you will see tons of undergrad pre-meds saying they want to join a lab to get published...most of them have no understanding as to how much work goes into getting a single paper submitted, let alone accepted and published. But, I guarantee, that the one semester of "work" they do in the lab makes them all think they are qualified to be authors on any papers that come out.

au·thor·ship (ô

th

r-sh

p

)n.1. The act, fact, or occupation of writing.
2. Source or origin, as of a book or idea

If you don't contribute to the writing and don't contribute any ideas, you are not (by definition) entitled to authorship.

Most premeds who are published have a good grasp of how much work goes into publication. They themselves have contributed to that work.

 

[shiftingmirage]

On the first page of a PNAS article, there is a foot note of sorts that says 'Author contributions' and then lists 'designed research, performed research, contributed new reagents/analytic tools, analyzed data, and wrote the paper'. Before each, there are the initials of the authors signifying who did what. I don't know if that is standard for all journals, or if those are all the designations. I said earlier that if ya did something significant, including data collection, I think you should go on the paper. Others disagreed saying there should be analytical analysis of the data. I would like to point out that the list has performed research and analyzed data as two seperate contributions. I would argue collecting data is 'performing research' and as such earns an author spot. Obviously, in the end of the day it is the guy who writes the thing that gets to decide the names that go on it.

 

[riceman04]

So I have been working at a lab for almost a year now. A couple of other students and I, one starting when I did, and another much later, have been working on a project for my PI. I find out that I am not on the draft for the paper, and the other two students are. I just don't know how to feel, we always used to split up work, worked as a team. It just gets to you, you kinda lose motivation.

When an opportunity for recognition slips by leaving you in the dust, you feel like you were not worth being recognized. I don't know. I got shafted. Has this happened to anyone else? Also, how do I prevent this on future projects? I don't feel like making any awkwardness between me and my PI, he's my physio teacher until Dec 18th. 🙂

riiiiiiiight...you always used to split up work...worked as a team...they do the important stuff while you take their lunch orders, make sure their workspace is clean, and clean labware!

j/k...

that sucks! keep moving! Keep working hard and things will work themselves out!

best of luck👍

 

[sully677]

We submitted a manuscript for pub a few months ago. During the review process, a rival lab came out with a paper almost identical to ours (thinking they took our idea from a national conference and ran with it). Crazy stuff happens. Just don't look back, and keep moving forward!

 

[kami333]

We submitted a manuscript for pub a few months ago. During the review process, a rival lab came out with a paper almost identical to ours (thinking they took our idea from a national conference and ran with it). Crazy stuff happens. Just don't look back, and keep moving forward!

I know a guy (MD/PhD) who just got his doctoral thesis scooped, two years down the drain.

I've had it happen in my research a few times and have also had papers rushed to be published in so-so journals (like an online only International Journal of X) when we got wind that another lab was preparing to submit something similar. It sucks, but nothing you can do other than keeping an eye on who is who in your field and what they are doing.

On the first paper submitted with my name on it (which finally got published this year, over 3 years later), I spent about 3weeks working on it. I had just joined the lab and I inherited the project we were doing with a collaborator from a postdoc that was leaving, troubleshooted it, and then spent 3days straight in the lab running the experiment and analyzing the data since they needed it to finish the paper (physiological measurements of a transgenic mice line).

 

[GellaBella]

I am not sure I understand what you are saying...all lab work, whether you do 100% or 0.00001% of it, requires you to follow protocols...Protocols are there so that your data is reliable and repeatable and so if there are problems, you can troubleshoot them. Saying that a person who just follows protocols isnt deserving of authorship and isnt contributing significantly to a project doesnt make sense.

If the person doesnt follow the protocols, I would say they dont deserve authorship.

In the end it simply comes down to the question: did the person make a significant contribution to the work. But, the concept of what is significant will be different for everybody you come across. Scan the forums and you will see tons of undergrad pre-meds saying they want to join a lab to get published...most of them have no understanding as to how much work goes into getting a single paper submitted, let alone accepted and published. But, I guarantee, that the one semester of "work" they do in the lab makes them all think they are qualified to be authors on any papers that come out.

So I have undergraduate students as well as masters students and medical students that come into my lab. I supervise them, provide them with protocols that I have thought about and written and tested to ensure that they work. I give the students some of my reagents and I give them background on the experiments (articles to read, discussion etc). Then they do the experiments, following what I have written. Lets say the next day I come in, look at the plates or whatever it is (I"m in micro so its usually plates) with the students and I talk to them about my interpretation of the results. Let's say the experiment doesn't show what I thought it would after a couple tries. Ok, now I have to go back to the drawing board - what is wrong? Is it a reagent? is it the protocol? is the hypothesis wrong? I come up with a new way to test the hypothesis, write out a new protocol and give it to the student. The student does it again - the next day we check the experimental results, now it looks better (or not). At the end of the day I am the person really doing the research. I could do the experiments myself (and probably faster) but students need research experience so we try to help them out. Now lets say 6 months go by and now when I come in in the morning the student says "that experiment didn't work, I think it's because of xyz, today I'm going to try xxx what do you think? and I say "yeah, that sounds like a good idea" or even if I say 'no that wouldn't work because remember..." NOW you've got a student who is thinking about their work, understanding the process and coming up with a new idea. A student that is driving their own project is definitely worthy of authorship. If something they suggest is used they are definitely entitled to authorship. But I expect that student to be independent...to come in in the morning knowing what they have to do for the day for their project, to ask questions if needed but to basically do the exp, get the data and analyze the data themselves.

 

[netminder]

Seriously, just talk to the PI. It was most likely an oversight. Put yourself it her/his shoes. S/he is in clinic +/- operating. S/he is supervising residents, graduate students, medical students, and pre-meds, probably. There is so much going on in this person's life at any one given time that who is doing exactly what in her/his lab is not something about which s/he is routinely thinking. I guarantee you this. People like this rely on the people in their labs to keep them abreast of what is going on, and what is going wrong.

S/he probably has no idea that this is even a problem. S/he will be glad you mentioned it.

 

[kywii]

I'm a big believer in transparency. I would definitely ask your PI about the paper and if there is an opportunity for authorship. I would also not be afraid to talk to your PI about what his expectations are about future papers. I've spent the last two years working for several different people in a clinical research setting (all the same job) and with each one I've definitely talked about my opportunities for publishing including how many publications we expect to get, will I be an author, and also if first authorship is available and this is even before I started working there. Make sure your PI know your goals while working in his lab. You will probably be surprised how much more you get out of the experience. You also prevent a lot of confusion that way.

 

[womp]

Thats incorrect. Data collection as simple data collection is not worthy of authorship. Data collection WITH analytical interpretation is. There needs to be thought behind it somehow. If you design the experiment and obtain the results you are worthy or some authorship. If you just come in, take a protocol, follow it exactly and then once you have the data someone else takes it and analyzes it...thats not authorship worthy regardless of how much time you spent doing it.

Dude you don't know what you are talking about. At the labs I worked with, the lab techs all got their names on the papers. They only did data collection (which is pretty much 90% of the work). A high schooler can analyze most of the assays I did in my lab. The hardest job was getting the pretty results.

It's going to suck for whoever works under you in a lab.

 

[BerlinDude]

Stand up for yourself, no one else is going to - unless you're comfortable getting screwed over for the rest of your life.

 

[BerlinDude]

Thats incorrect. Data collection as simple data collection is not worthy of authorship. Data collection WITH analytical interpretation is. There needs to be thought behind it somehow. If you design the experiment and obtain the results you are worthy or some authorship. If you just come in, take a protocol, follow it exactly and then once you have the data someone else takes it and analyzes it...thats not authorship worthy regardless of how much time you spent doing it.

Yea, nobody is going to want to work for/with you.

 

[wantVCUdental]

Thats incorrect. Data collection as simple data collection is not worthy of authorship. Data collection WITH analytical interpretation is. There needs to be thought behind it somehow. If you design the experiment and obtain the results you are worthy or some authorship. If you just come in, take a protocol, follow it exactly and then once you have the data someone else takes it and analyzes it...thats not authorship worthy regardless of how much time you spent doing it.

+1
Totally agree with the above

As for OP, i don't see why your PI would leave you out, there's no actual limit of the number of authors allowed on the application... so i am thinking either you didn't make significant contribution to the work or he was really busy and forgot to put you in (since PI's are always busy writing proposals and worrying about family stuff, it's entirely possible)

 

[wantVCUdental]

Yea, nobody is going to want to work for/with you.

What a lousy attitude, sounds like you are living in your own bubble

 

[randombetch]

Dude you don't know what you are talking about. At the labs I worked with, the lab techs all got their names on the papers. They only did data collection (which is pretty much 90% of the work). A high schooler can analyze most of the assays I did in my lab. The hardest job was getting the pretty results.

It's going to suck for whoever works under you in a lab.

I'd say in most cases, lab techs do not deserve publication.

 

[sunshinevet]

Dude you don't know what you are talking about. At the labs I worked with, the lab techs all got their names on the papers. They only did data collection (which is pretty much 90% of the work). A high schooler can analyze most of the assays I did in my lab. The hardest job was getting the pretty results.

It's going to suck for whoever works under you in a lab.

Yea, nobody is going to want to work for/with you.

Have you guys even ever read the criteria for authorship in a journal? Its not meant to just be whoever baked the PI the best cupcakes this week. For example, here is the authorship criteria from JAMA:

Authorship Criteria and Contributions and Authorship Form. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. One or more authors should take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, from inception to published article. Authorship credit should be based only on (1) substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; and (2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and (3) final approval of the version to be published. Conditions 1, 2, and 3 must all be met.3,4
​

http://jama.ama-assn.org/misc/ifora.dtl#AuthorshipCriteriaandContributionsandAuthorshipForm

Most journals have similar criteria. Just because you collected data in a lab DOES NOT mean that you deserve authorship.

 

[GellaBella]

and just for clarification

I'm saying that doing those things (data collection without thought) does not mean you automatically DESERVE authorship - you can be granted authorship if your PI chooses to, but you shouldn't expect to be put on a paper for that sort of work.

The submitting author has to indicate what each author on the paper has contributed. In scientific publications your ethics and integrity is EVERYTHING. If you lie about something like this...what else might you do unethically in your lab etc.

I'm not saying that lab techs and others do not get their names on papers because of course in some places they do. If that is the way the PI wants to handle it and has always handled it, that is their perogative.

I know at my institute some labs are more relaxed with the rules while some are more strict.

In my lab, if I want to get included on a paper that is not specifically on my project, I listen up during lab meetings when other people are presenting, I suggest ideas for improving their work etc.

I've done experiments for others in my lab without thinking about them, just doing what they told me, and I've done them not EXPECTING authorship.

Thats the difference.
I think that when I have my own lab I will be fair with publications. But I would also be upfront with people coming into my lab about my expectations and about what is necessary to obtain authorship.

Leaving things in the dark only breeds problems down the road when lab members begin fighting over authorship issues because clear guidelines haven't been put in place.