Publishing papers as second, third or fourth author??

[Ohm]

My Undergraduate research paper just got published in IEEE Xplore and I'm the third author (out of four) in a major international conference (held in a different country). I also was the sole presenter of the same. Thing is, the fist author is my guide, justified why he should be first author by saying 'My idea, my program, etc.' So I was the second author. Then he took in 2 people under his guidance for their PhD and suddenly decided that their names should also appear in the paper. What more, he put their names before mine (making me the last author). One of the 2 professors realized that it was very unethical and backed to being the last author and I was pushed to third. 

 

I know it's great that I've presented this paper right at an undergraduate level, but I thought it was very unfair. I worked hard on the project (being the sole student working under him), put up with all his idiocies (he's the MOODIEST, highly egoistic guy and the other girl who was working with me actually ran away to a different project!) and I did do my own programming (whose results were perfect but he insisted on using his). Agreed that the idea was his, but I think that doesn't give him any right to pull in the other 2 guys, what more degrade me down to third author. Arguing with him about it would only have lost me even that position - he's that sort of a guy who thinks he and his principles are always right.

 

So here's my question - How good is this third authorship for an undergraduate student applying to really good graduate schools? Will it just increase my publication count or will it be considered significantly to add to my research capability? 

 

P.S: I'm applying to allied fields of interest only - not the exact same as the research topic of my undergrad project, but it's in the same field (Electrical engineering, Power systems)

[booksnlooks]

That sucks that your prof pushed you around like that! As for grad programs, the fact that you have a publication coming out of undergrad would probably be an asset even if you aren't first author. Don't forget to list the presentation on your CV as well!

[Ohm]

Thanks booksnlooks.....I do have 3 other journal pubs with 2 as first author and one as second (not really great ones but ok nonetheless) but they're not in the relevant field...hence the worry. I have mentioned it in my resume 

[Monochrome Spring]

Having any publication, even not a first author, will look very good for graduate admissions. Graduate admissions committees are looking to see how good you'll be at research and publishing your results. If you've already proven that you can do that, it'll set you apart from other applicants.

[Ohm]

Being 3 rejects ahead, I'm starting to doubt that now...

[aberrant]

Having any publication, even not a first author, will look very good for graduate admissions. Graduate admissions committees are looking to see how good you'll be at research and publishing your results. If you've already proven that you can do that, it'll set you apart from other applicants.

 

 

Being 3 rejects ahead, I'm starting to doubt that now...

 

That actually depends on the field of study, and sometimes, depends on the member (of the adcom) who reviews an applicant's profile.

 

Some field is a lot easier to get published than the other (e.g. organic synthesis (chemistry) can get published in months, whereas structural biology may years, depends on the topic.)

 

I'm not sure what do you mean by "author in a major conference". Assuming your research has been published in a journal, and you presented your published research in that conference, then there are 2 things going on: 1. you published, and 2. your presented. In terms of publication, some adcom members only concern whether an applicant's publication has a high impact factor (e.g. Science, Nature, etc.), while some others care less about the impact factor and more about the position (contribution) of your name in a publication, other than the quality of the manuscript. It depends on a lot of factors, including but not limited to how the reviewer found him/herself familiar with the applicant's background / research (e.g. an evolution biologist may not know who's "hot" or "big" in higher energy physics research.) If you were the main contributor in that research project, that you want to have them aware of that. Give credit where credit due, you deserve every bit of your recognition if majority of the published work was yours.

 

ps. Based on the same logic, having a 1st author publication that is totally rubbish will not help ones chances for admission. that's why sometimes grad school admission is rather "unpredictable".

Edited February 21, 2013 by aberrant