Authorship

[Dal PhDer]

I think this is very important to consider, because if you change the order yourself, then you're just doing the same thing that your advisor (or someone else) did.

I didn't think of it like this- that's a very good point.

I guess I am struggling to figure out if it's worth a battle and potentially getting on his bad side. I do agree with you Fuzzy, this might be his way of testing me and my abilities to handle a situation where there might be potential confrontation. I guess I went into this whole thing thinking that 'oh gee, I would like to have the publication, it would help me out...but in the long run I would like to be on my advisor's good side.' ...perhaps pushing it a bit more will get me in better standing with him.

I certainly have taken a step back on the paper and it's progress...I wanted to wait and make sure my next move of handing it off was done in the best possible manner. Perhaps the most mature/professional approach would be to send the edited version to him and within that email say something along the lines of: "During our last meeting we discussed authorship. I am a bit unsure of where your final stance is, but I would like to further discuss this with you and the others. I have worked on this with the understanding and goal of it being a substantial contribution to my CV as a first author publication."

I am sure you know my personality by now, but I try and avoid conflict or coming off as overly abrasive or confrontational. I am going to try and make a culture shift in academia...where hugs and cookies is the norm, rather than aloof and discouraging behaviours!

[Dal PhDer]

ETA: I just reread the post and realized it sounds kind of harsh. My take on this situation is that your advisor is "testing" you. You need to push back and not let him get away with this. My guess is that he'll respect you more and stop trying to mess with you (at least temporarily), if you do.

No no! it wasn't too harsh! I really appreciate the feedback and advice. I really do think about it, and use it! I think in these situations, where it's a student/advisor relationship and a situation where the student is worried/concerned, it's best to get multiple perspectives and opinions. I really don't want to do something that is heated or irrational just because i am upset or scared of confrontation! SO I appreciate the push and suggestions

Edited July 29, 2012 by Dal PhDer

[fuzzylogician]

Look, only you know your advisor and the situation, and therefore you're the only one who can assess what will happen if you push back. He could take it well, or he could insist on his position and then you'll have a decision to make about what you do next. It's important to know what his motivation is for changing authorship (are you completely sure it's him who changed it?). Does he think he deserves it or is there another legitimate (from his point of view) reason? If there is none and he is being an a**hole, do you want to / have to continue working with him? I have experience with similar situations that I don't want to share here because I'm not really anonymous on this site but my conclusion is that yes, some people may "like" you less because you're not the quiet girl they can push around and take advantage of -- but they will respect you more. I've learned to give credit when it's due and also to demand it when it's due, too.

[lewin]

I think the above make great points and more assertive confrontation might be a good idea. That's a judgement call. But for me, myself, I would leave it be. From my reading you had the assumption of first-authorship but this was never made explicit (right?) and writing does not necessarily mean first authorship, though it usually does. I would assume that my advisor and I both made assumptions, regret it, and be more explicit next time.

[Dal PhDer]

There is certainly a lot of back story and- i sadly admit - a history of tension between my advisor and myself. I don't always agree with the way he handles himself with his students (my labmates) and myself. Knowing this history, and his personality...for me, I think it is better to back off. I have been mulling this over a lot lately, and the majority of the stress comes from knowing his personality, demeaner, and his reactions to students who question him.

I think this has been a really great learning experience, and certainly in the future I will (1) get clear and written details on authorship, duties, and expectations; and (2) limit my outside collaborations with him. Being within an interdisiciplinary program, I think I am at an advantage as my project is only slightly inline with his expertise and background...this gives me the opportunity to find potential collaborations with outside faculty that might meet my interests a bit better.

And honestly, he's so hot and cold and in and out that when it comes to submitting it to the journal, he might say "No, this is yours" and change it.

[AbaNader]

Dal PhDer: your adviser sounds like a complete J A C K A S S.

Sorry, but it had to be said.

[Burkis]

There is certainly a lot of back story and- i sadly admit - a history of tension between my advisor and myself. I don't always agree with the way he handles himself with his students (my labmates) and myself. Knowing this history, and his personality...for me, I think it is better to back off. I have been mulling this over a lot lately, and the majority of the stress comes from knowing his personality, demeaner, and his reactions to students who question him.

I think this has been a really great learning experience, and certainly in the future I will (1) get clear and written details on authorship, duties, and expectations; and (2) limit my outside collaborations with him. Being within an interdisiciplinary program, I think I am at an advantage as my project is only slightly inline with his expertise and background...this gives me the opportunity to find potential collaborations with outside faculty that might meet my interests a bit better.

And honestly, he's so hot and cold and in and out that when it comes to submitting it to the journal, he might say "No, this is yours" and change it.

Sounds awful. I'm currently collaborating on an article with a prof at Dal and she made it clear from the onset that I would be first author. We've run into other headaches since then but order of authorship has remained firm. Best of luck.

[Burkis]

Sounds awful. I'm currently collaborating on an article with a prof at Dal and she made it clear from the onset that I would be first author. We've run into other headaches since then but order of authorship has remained firm. Best of luck.

OK, scratch what I just said. Just finished drafting an article as first aurthor. A prof did a bit of "editing" afterwards. Same prof just invited some other prof to place his name on the paper as well even though I previously objected to that idea because that prof has contributed nothing to the write-up of the article and his name will not lend anything to it. Writing sucks.

[Dal PhDer]

OK, scratch what I just said. Just finished drafting an article as first aurthor. A prof did a bit of "editing" afterwards. Same prof just invited some other prof to place his name on the paper as well even though I previously objected to that idea because that prof has contributed nothing to the write-up of the article and his name will not lend anything to it. Writing sucks.

Sorry to hear that!

Yeah, the writing process is certainly an experience...one that is a lot less straight forward than I thought!

Hopefully it will work out for you!

[mandarin.orange]

OK, scratch what I just said. Just finished drafting an article as first aurthor. A prof did a bit of "editing" afterwards. Same prof just invited some other prof to place his name on the paper as well even though I previously objected to that idea because that prof has contributed nothing to the write-up of the article and his name will not lend anything to it. Writing sucks.

I definitely had these feelings for my paper, so it's normal. We had the one collaborator who never bothered to correspond with me or reply to feedback requests, but she stayed on the list because she'd run samples for us at a discounted rate years ago, as a trade for authorship. Then author #2 (my MS advisor) wanted to add someone else to do a few stats AFTER the initial review process, a person I'd had a string of super-awkward encounters with long ago.

As long as you keep the #1 spot, just go with it. Your advisor's already exhibiting generosity of authorship with you, and this will likely not be the last time this generosity gets extended to others, however mysterious his/her motives may seem right now. Generosity of authorship should be a requirement of a good advisor, by the way...I find what the OP's has done really irksome and the not the least bit shady. I immediately wonder if he (Shady Advisor) has impending tenure review or something external that's making him renege on a promise to one of his hard-working grad student.

And speaking of promises, I made one to myself that for the next manuscript, I'll be less invested and worked up about these things. I think that professors see this as a gesture of goodwill to the suddenly-added author, more than anything, and as your CV builds with enough publications, stressing out over inclusion/exclusion of authors and their order is a battle not worth fighting. My current advisor lives by a mantra of always erring on the side of collegiality and goodwill, and I believe this to be a good (if sometimes difficult) practice.

[Dal PhDer]

And speaking of promises, I made one to myself that for the next manuscript, I'll be less invested and worked up about these things.

I made this promise to myself as well!

[mandarin.orange]

This article came out a few months ago (I'm still getting caught up on mail from professional societies), but it immediately made me think of this thread and Dal PhDer's situation. Despite this topic being inactive for a bit, I thought I would share:

Too many authors, too few creators

I had to access through my uni's proxy server to the library to see it, so sorry if anyone can't access it. PM me if you want a copy.

Most relevant part of the article:

"A friend of mine, a former Bell Labs physicist, defended the inclusion of his name to the end of the author queue of each paper published by his students though many of the ideas were entirely his. His reasoning was that 'the graduate student should always have top billing so that his career can be advanced.' Each author’s personal list of 'first author' publications was certainly increased by my friend’s unselfish generosity. It remained up to the reader to figure out whose ideas were actually being presented."