Deciding Authorship Order
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ค. 2018
- ACS AuthorUniversity, Episode 11
Deciding Authorship Order
Over the past several years, the number of coauthors on papers has been increasing. Papers with large numbers of coauthors are increasingly common, with the number of papers sporting more than 50 coauthors increasing from about 200 a year in 1990 to about 1,400 in 2014.. But with increasing co-authorships, comes additional concerns about who should receive credit for what. It is the responsibility of the submitting author to report authorship and contributions fairly. However, it’s not always abundantly clear who should be an author and who should be mentioned in the acknowledgement section. Watch this video to hear ACS Editors weigh in on what constitutes authorship.
Subscribe! bit.ly/AmerChemSOc
Facebook! / americanchemicalsociety
Twitter! / amerchemsociety
For more information, please visit: pubs.acs.org/page/4authors/in...
You might also like:
Episode 2: Communicating your Research to the Public: Special Considerations (Because it's Science!): bit.ly/2Nw0USJ
Episode 4: How to Write a Scientific Article: Find the Story: bit.ly/2MVaFbY
Produced by the American Chemical Society, the world’s largest scientific society. ACS is a global leader in providing access to chemistry-related information and research through its multiple databases, peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences.
Join the American Chemical Society! bit.ly/Join_ACS
![เปิดบ้านสุดหรู "เเจ็ค the ghost" ลั่นถ้าป๋องกพลลำบากผมเลี้ยงเอง!! l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1xbW4vULqGc/mqdefault.jpg)
![เปิดบ้านสุดหรู "เเจ็ค the ghost" ลั่นถ้าป๋องกพลลำบากผมเลี้ยงเอง!! l [Nickynachat]](/img/tr.png)
I was most fascinated and convinced by the professor Joan F. Bennecke's opinion. She speaks not only of how important it is to determine in advance the role of each scientist, but also of how vital communication as a whole is. I liked her statement about the need to think collectively and understand how before them the scientific work was carried around the world. It also indicates that scientists will be ready for unexpected turns, mutual support and fresh creative vision
I haven't encountered the difficulty of determining authorship in the scientific field. Although this happened to me a couple of times during my journalistic practice. In those cases I tried to pay attention to the contribution of each author
These kinds of videos are great to beginners scientist who are just starting and learning to publish a paper.
Hope you keep making them!
1. I think Gillian is a very interesting and unique speaker. The author says that something new needs to be discovered, but in modern society this is not enough. I liked that he said that everyone should be given a chance.
2. I still can't express my opinion on this. Basically, everyone is right
American chemical society presents deciding authorship order by speeches of professors. I suppose Joan F. Brennecke's idea. She said about early communication. But,I think, there will be a problem during research time among authors. According to professor Olaf C. Wiest, we should clearly define roles. Yes, it's good idea: someone will response for the text, someone for graphics, someone for surveying and analysis, someone for experimental part. In this case I agree with George Schatz: all students will be equal authors. If all write with making intellectual contribution.
I hadn't any experience in this field. And this was great explanation for further.
What about your personal experience?
The relation to the author's order was explained generically but from different sides. Joan F. Brennecke, professor of Chemical engineering says that everything needs to be discussed before starting work, to talk and determine who and what will do. I think this is the best option to initially determine who will contribute in what direction in order to avoid any misunderstandings. I only wrote the first article, I did not work in a collaboration, so I did not face the problems of authorship. Through recommended literature, I get acquainted with the features of the author's order, there is no difficulties with it yet :)
Firstly, I wish to express my gratitude to all experts in this video, after that to show my appreciation to Professor George Schatz, who clear explained ewverything which potential authors must knowabout the authorship order.
Personally ,I haven`t had such problems related to the authorship, however in a near future I`m going to work on a research and these tips are very useful for the work.
1. Ph. D Jillian Burriak is an attractive and interesting speaker. I liked her speech about collaborations which can lead to complicated authorship. She said - it’s best to get this out in the open as soon as possible
2. I have encountered a situation where it was difficult to determine what every author do in research
The Olapf G. Wiests tell about clearly define roles. I prefer his opinion, because this helps to clearly share responsibilities between authors. In this way, we can prevent conflicts and improve performance. So
the exchange of personal knowledge will reveal the problems of scientific work from different angles.
What about your own experience? Second question...
Personally, I liked Joan F. Brennecke's opinion that the most important thing is to discuss before starting research. So that we can avoid big problems, which naturally can adversely affect our work. Therefore, it is better to discuss all topics related to research (past experience, other studies, new discoveries, etc.) with your team or adviser. In addition, we have to divide the role of each member of the team. It is significant for work efficiency.
I haven't encountered the problems with authorship. I think these recommendations from professors will help to avoid it in the future.
The authorship procedure should be a joint decision of the co-authors. All persons designated as authors must claim authorship, and all who are eligible to participate must be indicated. Persons participating in the study but not meeting the criteria for authorship should be listed as “Assistant” or “Person of Appreciation”. Examples include: consultations in research, provision of space and equipment for research, assistance in obtaining financial support.
What about the second question?
Olaf G.Wiest mentioned that clearly define role is essential in order to continue work in right way. Because, every member of team influences for the process of the work. Therefore, everyone should consider this opinion when will start scientific work. I haven`t face to such as problem. I think if people prefer work together their goal and direction must be the same.
I liked Olaf G.Wiest's and George Schatz's opinion that authors must clearly define roles.Each co-author is responsible for considering his or her role in the project and whether that role merits attribution of authorship. Co-authors should review and approve the manuscript, at least as it pertains to their roles in the project.
What about your personal experience?
@@user-qr9fc7gn4w I had an experience doing project work with my partner,and even she didn't participate in many important parts of work,she was one of the first author,so I think people must define their roles in such projects and take a responsibility for their parts
I liked the expert opinion of Joan F. Brennecke, Ph.D. Because she said the study members should discuss the topic together at the very beginning of writing the paper. I also think this is an important part, so that the research is qualitative and logical, you need to clearly define the goals and objectives together. since if there is no one goal, it will turn out like Krylov's famous fable " the Swan, the crab and the pike"
Second question.....
@@user-qr9fc7gn4w full. 1.I liked the expert opinion of Joan F. Brennecke, Ph.D. Because she said the study members should discuss the topic together at the very beginning of writing the paper. I also think this is an important part, so that the research is qualitative and logical, you need to clearly define the goals and objectives together. since if there is no one goal, it will turn out like Krylov's famous fable " the Swan, the crab and the pike"
2.Yes, but not often. I've mostly seen articles with one or two authors.it is difficult to determine the author when you liked a statement that you would like to add to your article and analyze the author's opinion.it is difficult to specify all the authors when it is not a direct citation but an analysis
I have (first) authored 2 papers so far, I had this issue both times. First time it was just the two of us and the second time, it was 6 authors.
The whole discuss thing dosen't really work in geology. Someone did the field work, someone prepared methodology, someone did the analysis work in the lab, it was all very complicated and there wasn't a way for us to actually separate this fairly.
So in geology, we have a great way to solve such issues, and it is 100% effective.
Just challenge them to a duel.
Or in her second case, russian roulette.
Did you know anything about equal authorship?
So, there are two opinions of experts that I'd like the most. It's Joah F. Brennecke and Brabley D. Smith.
In Joah case, I share her idea about discussing authorship order before scientists are going to start. I think it's the most suitable option out there because there are not any exaggerated expectations that somehow can make negative impact during the writing paper. And also, it's more easier to control the whole process as everyone in the team exactly know what has to do and awares about their role in the scientific article. More importantly she also, mention that graduate students are need training courses where they could learn to publication ethics which is vital these days.
Moving on to the next speaker, Brabley who's saying that it's becoming a hateful trend to see in CV of researchers a statement of how much they contributed for each paper. In my opinion, it's more equally among scientists team. For example, when a person go to a new workplace carrying his/her CV, where let's say directorship sees the level of participation in the scientific work. So, may be other side of this is can be a positive because it might encourage to try to be a first author to grow the value of the CV.
What about your own experience?
@@user-qr9fc7gn4w If I had something in my past I would definitely say about it, but unfortunately theres no anything to share with, sorry
It’s definitely used as currency
I liked JOAN F.BRENNECKE,Ph.D’s opinion that authors think early communication is key says that everything needs to be discussed before starting work, to talk and determine who and what will do. I think this is the best option to initially determine who will contribute in what direction in order to avoid any misunderstandings，i only wrote one article,and i didn’t collaborate with anyone,so it was right for me to communicate and collaborate as early as possible with out encountering authorship issues