Timeline for How to indicate when another author has done nothing significant
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
35 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 5, 2023 at 8:32 | comment | added | shuhalo | @SamHopkins: It's academic dishonesty, and it's pervasive throughout mathematics. The vast majority of my collaborators haven't contributed anything at all to the paper. | |
| Nov 22, 2022 at 2:21 | comment | added | ABIM | @TimothyChow this is interesting trivia. Didn't know tbh, but that'd a much worse situation imo | |
| Nov 21, 2022 at 19:45 | comment | added | Timothy Chow | I believe that Ralph Alpher was bitter about the Alpher-Bethe-Gamow paper to his dying day. | |
| Nov 17, 2022 at 0:04 | comment | added | ABIM | @efs By "political" I mean that I am cosupervising a student with them and they are contributing the funding since in my county grants are incomparably smaller. | |
| Nov 17, 2022 at 0:03 | comment | added | ABIM | @HollisWilliams Yes, one of them had only come to 3 meetings at the beginning and only made jokes. | |
| Oct 31, 2022 at 20:07 | comment | added | Hollis Williams | @AnderBiguri I agree that this new Author Contributions section being introduced in many science papers is very helpful. | |
| Oct 31, 2022 at 16:21 | comment | added | Ander Biguri | As someone that works in applied fields (engineering/physical sciences) where everyone and their mum gets authorship: Have an "author contributions" section in the paper, after acknowledgments. In fact, many Elsevier paper require this now, as its so blatant in many fields. | |
| Oct 31, 2022 at 11:27 | comment | added | Hollis Williams | Are you sure that they contributed absolutely nothing to the article? You at least need to discuss with the senior author and then allow the other author to describe what they contributed to the article and how they contributed, which may include things that did not occur to you. | |
| Oct 30, 2022 at 21:02 | comment | added | Adam Přenosil | Suppose that you could indeed somehow convey to the readers of your paper that some of your coauthors did not contribute anything of significance. How exactly do you imagine you can do this so that the general reader will notice your insinuation that your coauthors X and Y did not contribute anything but your coauthors X and Y will not? | |
| Oct 30, 2022 at 5:54 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Oct 30, 2022 at 2:47 | vote | accept | ABIM | ||
| Oct 30, 2022 at 2:45 | comment | added | ABIM | @YaakovBaruch This is true, and I guess this has happened in the past to me so ill try to keep it in mind. Thanks, very helpful and wise :) | |
| Oct 30, 2022 at 1:29 | history | edited | LSpice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Proofreading
|
| Oct 30, 2022 at 0:14 | comment | added | Yaakov Baruch | Whatever you can do within the paper to demarcate the different contributions is of course legitimate, but what I wouldn't do is speaking or hinting behind the back of the co-authors that they did not quite contribute. Generally, if a the paper is important and others will want to collaborate, it's almost inevitable that they will eventually realize who the active authors were. It may worth accepting a measure of unfairness with grace and humor, and such situations, usually, have a way of rectifying themselves. | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 23:52 | comment | added | Brendan McKay | A comment on the concept of "contribution". When a group of people work on a problem, it is almost always the case that the key ideas in the solution come from a proper subset. That doesn't mean the others didn't contribute. Actively taking part in the discussion is contribution too. | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 23:27 | review | Close votes | |||
| Nov 4, 2022 at 3:09 | |||||
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:44 | vote | accept | ABIM | ||
| Oct 30, 2022 at 2:47 | |||||
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:44 | comment | added | ABIM | @YiftachBarnea Thanks, this is a very good idea tbh. I appreciate it and prefer this for the above suggestion of cutting a paper in two (it should be 1 for full umph). | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:40 | comment | added | Yiftach Barnea | @AIM I am not sure there is any formal way to do this by your own action and certainly not one which will not create more troubles than it is worth. However, it seems to me that you should first talk to your other contributing coauthor, maybe they feel differently to you or maybe they have a suggestion what to do. In any case, before you act you should talk to these two other people, separately. This is the fair thing to do and maybe if you will raise the issue, they will agree with you and suggest to remove their authorship. Good luck! | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:39 | answer | added | David White | timeline score: 31 | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:25 | comment | added | H A Helfgott | Coauthors that don't work and that don't bow out when they should are an eternal problem. | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:23 | comment | added | ABIM | @efs they organize many conferences workshops in my niche, they are connected to nearly every top researcher in my area, and they will say their negative opinion of me if I "upset them" by kicking them off the paper.... so it seems I'm stuck at an impass... | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:16 | comment | added | efs | "political issues" sounds too serious. Perhaps you could give more details on why you can't remove them from your research. | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:15 | comment | added | ABIM | @bof I will, this is an excellent idea. But frightening since they have collaborated for 20 years or so... | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:14 | comment | added | ABIM | @SamHopkins and verret: yes I also feel this way. I mean this is my main issue. I don't want them to attract students if they are incapable of guiding them. It's just wrong.... | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:13 | comment | added | ABIM | @HerculePoirot I started the project, and one of the authors said that they were experts who are so great (bla bla), I invited them excited for our intellectual exchange, but it never happened. Only two people on zoom every month saying void comments... | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:09 | comment | added | Hercule Poirot | How did they come to be there in the first place? Who initiated the project? | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:07 | comment | added | verret | See for example ams.org/about-us/governance/policy-statements/sec-ethics "All the authors listed for a paper, however, must have made a significant contribution to its content, and all who have made such a contribution must be offered the opportunity to be listed as an author. Because the free exchange of ideas necessary to promote research is possible only when every individual's contribution is properly recognized, the Society will not knowingly publish anything that violates this principle." | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:07 | comment | added | verret | In mathematical culture, authorship represents a significant intellectual contribution to the work. Listing them as authors if they haven't contributed is unethical and could lead to your paper being rejected on that basis (or worse). | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:05 | comment | added | bof | Have you asked the other significant contributor's opinion? | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:05 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | Let me be clear: if some of the listed "authors" literally contributed nothing to the research, then having them listed as authors is academic dishonesty. | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 22:02 | comment | added | ABIM | @SamHopkins Yes I thought of this also, it's a good idea. I guess if I'm in my 30s and everyone else is in their 60s, maybe it's implicitly understood that I'm not in thevback seat but rather i am a principal contributor?.. Donno | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 21:59 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | That being said, perhaps splitting the content of the research into multiple papers could help? | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 21:58 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | To me this fundamentally looks like a social problem, I don't think there can be a technical solution... | |
| Oct 29, 2022 at 21:53 | history | asked | ABIM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |