Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Science.org)   So you did not conceive of the experiment, you did not do the experiment, you did no analysis, and you did no writing. So naturally you are listed as an author of the peer-reviewed paper   (science.org) divider line
    More: Asinine, Science, Academic publishing, Author, lead author of a paper, honorary authorship, standard approach, manuscript's authors, senior researchers  
•       •       •

837 clicks; posted to STEM » on 29 Sep 2022 at 10:36 AM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



21 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-09-29 10:00:20 AM  
Congratulations, you've discovered how the world works.

Many, if not most professionals can attest that the first decade or so in a career is spent making higher-ups look good and rich. I don't even want to think about the millions in performance bonuses my managers made off of my work 15-20 years ago. Since part of my job was inventing the performance management system at that company, I know how much my managers got paid. For the work I did.
 
2022-09-29 10:44:45 AM  
I've been getting emails from Nature and some other pubs asking me if I am the author of study X or Y for a few years now.

I have never submitted a paper to any journal of any sort.
 
2022-09-29 10:55:37 AM  
Your paper has a much higher chance of being published if there's a well known name on it, because no one has figured out how to peer review human nature.
 
2022-09-29 11:00:09 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: Your paper has a much higher chance of being published if there's a well known name on it, because no one has figured out how to peer review human nature.


Not being allowed to see authors until after your review is posted seems an obvious first step.

I'm told some journals do this already, and in some small circles, they're know who wrote it despite this. But it does seem to be a minimum effort, IMO.
 
2022-09-29 11:04:20 AM  
You know how like when a rapper wins an award, there are like 20 of them on stage to accept it?

It's like that.
 
2022-09-29 11:07:30 AM  
THIS JUST IN: Peer Review is BS

/old news is so exciting.jpg
 
2022-09-29 11:07:46 AM  

BeesNuts: I've been getting emails from Nature and some other pubs asking me if I am the author of study X or Y for a few years now.

I have never submitted a paper to any journal of any sort.


Think THAT'S bad, wait until you find out that I've been getting residuals off of your previous work for decades. It isn't the income stream it used to be, but it still pays for Asian massages
 
2022-09-29 11:47:25 AM  
But the kids love us
 
2022-09-29 12:25:20 PM  
Eh, "authors" is a misnomer though. It really should be something more all-encompassing, like contributors. Or maybe a second section for contributors. My wife works on grants and reviews papers all the time, so I hear a lot of interesting stuff (we're both remote, so she's right across the room from me and basically on the phone all day).

There are occasions when data providers are put on the authors list because they had access and could produce the relevant data, maybe even had specialized ETL skills for creating the exact dataset that was needed.

I once got added to a Ph.D thesis paper because I gave my friend access to a high performance compute cluster. All I did was create an account and open the firewall. I didn't even know until he sent me a copy.
 
2022-09-29 12:30:50 PM  
That sounds like some of the shenanigans behind my last divorce.
 
2022-09-29 12:58:08 PM  

BeesNuts: I've been getting emails from Nature and some other pubs asking me if I am the author of study X or Y for a few years now.

I have never submitted a paper to any journal of any sort.


Ray, when Nature asks if you authored a paper, you say yes!

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-09-29 1:11:48 PM  
As one person mentioned having a "name" on a paper makes it more likely it will be reviewed and respected.

As another person said even blind submission things can be obvious who is involved based on the subject matter or title.
 
2022-09-29 1:21:56 PM  

Ambitwistor: BeesNuts: I've been getting emails from Nature and some other pubs asking me if I am the author of study X or Y for a few years now.

I have never submitted a paper to any journal of any sort.

Ray, when Nature asks if you authored a paper, you say yes!

[Fark user image 425x176]


But I don't even SPEAK Taiwanese!
 
2022-09-29 1:40:35 PM  

Quantumbunny: Marcus Aurelius: Your paper has a much higher chance of being published if there's a well known name on it, because no one has figured out how to peer review human nature.

Not being allowed to see authors until after your review is posted seems an obvious first step.

I'm told some journals do this already, and in some small circles, they're know who wrote it despite this. But it does seem to be a minimum effort, IMO.


Some journals require a listing of what each author did.

Removing names is certainly a good idea, but there are a lot of cases which who is behind the paper will be obvious to any knowledgeable reviewer: The astronomer who got time on the JWST to observe the Fark Nebula is public so any paper submitted before the data becomes public domain will be theirs. A new fossil hominin will clearly be from the guys with the rights to excavate the area from which is found.  An experiment which used an expensive piece of equipment will probably be from the team which has it.  A paper with arguing for X is probably by the guy who been arguing for X for years. Many subfields don't have so many people that writing styles might be recognized.
 
2022-09-29 1:52:52 PM  

mjbok: As one person mentioned having a "name" on a paper makes it more likely it will be reviewed and respected.


In my experience, the names usually end up on the list due to funding, not peer review.

Having big names on your papers during the funding process is a big deal.  Getting funding is heavily based on your past performance.  If you got funding in the past and produced useful science, you're much more likely to get funding in the future.  The big names have long histories, so their endorsement really does help.

Also, there's a good chance that the big names on your list are buddies with somebody on the committee, so that always helps too.

Once you use their name in the funding process, its pretty hard to take the name off when the actual paper comes out.  So it stays on even though its not a huge deal for the actual peer review.
 
2022-09-29 2:46:16 PM  
The only time this was acceptable was as a joke by George Gamow and his student, Ralph Alpher.
 
2022-09-29 4:51:50 PM  
Let's compromise.  Just do what Hollywood does and give these "honorary authors" an "Executive Producer" credit.
 
2022-09-29 5:26:21 PM  
Ever see the names list on an IBM patent?
 
2022-09-29 6:14:02 PM  
I've added the names of almost everyone that helped. Doesn't cost me anything, and gets their names out there for others to see.

I leave it up to them to decide if they put it on their CV or not. AFAIK, those with minimal contributions leave it off. They wouldn't be able to describe the work if called out on it, so they don't take the risk.
 
2022-09-29 9:07:47 PM  
My last collaboration had a "publications committee" who decided that the authors list for papers included PhDs and people working on PhDs.  I was neither, so I don't appear on papers... but since I took most of the data, I am thanked for that at the end of every paper.  For routine "telegram" announcements, I was on the list.  One year, one of the grad students was working on a conference poster at the last minute, couldn't get hold of the publications committee, and just grabbed a list off a telegram, so I was on the authors list for that poster... and asked that they send me a PDF of it just in case anyone in the future ever asked me about it.

/Not currently in any such collaborations
//Still get thanked now and then in papers
///Making large, expensive scientific equipment do what people want.  It's a dirty, job, but someone SLASHIES
 
2022-09-30 5:04:10 AM  
So if you did't conceive the experiment, didn't do the experiment, did no analysis, and you didn't write anything, maybe you were the Subject?

- I bet that's also why they named the disease after you!  Luck-ee!
 
Displayed 21 of 21 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.