I am a graduate student in pure math, namely graph theory and combinatorics. I have recently been nominated by my department to be the math department candidate for a university-wide research award. In the award application materials, it asks for my CV and is very specific that the authors names need to be in the same order as on the published paper so that the level of my involvement can be judged.

I am in a field where the convention is to put all names of co-authors alphabetically, regardless of input. It is clear to me that I need to mention this on my CV, but I am worried that if I just say that that the order of the authors is irrelevant in my field, the people judging my CV will be unsatisfied because then they won’t have any information about how much I contributed to each paper.

Is there a tactful way to deal with this issue?

I am a graduate student in pure math, namely graph theory and combinatorics. I have recently been nominated by my department to be the math department candidate for a university-wide research award. In the award application materials, it asks for my CV and is very specific that the authors names need to be in the same order as on the published paper so that the level of my involvement can be judged.

I am in a field where the convention is to put all names of co-authors alphabetically, regardless of input. It is clear to me that I need to mention this on my CV, but I am worried that if I just say that that the order of the authors is irrelevant in my field, the people judging my CV will be unsatisfied because then they won’t have any information about how much I contributed to each paper.

Is there a tactful way to deal with this issue?

I created a model for the pathogenesis of a neurodegenerative disorders that reveals a novel target for neurorestoration/neuroprotection. Can I patent the use of an existing compound for another purpose since I have reason to believe it would also act to target neurodegeneration in this disease?

To provide some background, I’m a recent Ivy League alum who hasn’t been able to secure a long-term position in a lab (in grad school or as a job). I’ve done an extensive analysis of the literature and believe I’ve found a number of solid papers to support my claim but, of course, since my clout in research is nonexistent, I’m not sure what to do. My advisor who supervised this work is still saying we can publish the manuscript where I explained my model this summer but I’m afraid that if there’s multiple people on the paper, some of whom are bigger names in the fields of biochemistry, neurodegeneration, and medicine than me, it’ll look like it wasn’t completely my idea.

Should I use a preprint server, a provisional patent (even though I can’t afford the full $5000 patent that you need to protect your patent status.), or ask one of the potential co-authors directly what she thinks (she’s huge in the field of neurodegeneration)? I’m not trying to sound self-important, I’m just really anxious to capitalize on my effort, which involved a lot of work, before someone else does. How important does someone have to be in molecular neurobiology for a new idea from them to be taken seriously?

I’ve noticed several instances of papers in mathematics which include an appendix written by someone who is not among the authors of the main body of the paper (for instance, here).

I’m quite curious about this practice (I don’t have a practical reason for asking, except for wanting to understand academic environment a little better). Specifically:

  1. What’s the motivation for the authors to for this kind of partition? It seems that it would be entirely within the ethical and cultural norms to simply write a joint paper, or to write two independent papers. Joint paper seems like a much easier option, two disjoint papers is simpler and more clear cut (and a cynical person might add – produces more citations).

  2. For the sake of keeping track of publications (for the sake of CV, citation counts, etc.) does the author of an appendix count as being one of the authors of the paper, not being among the authors of the paper, or being the sole author of the appendix which counts as an independent publication?

I need advice regarding the copyright of the work done as a research associate.

I am working for a university as a research associate and my principal investigator insists on publishing my work without my consent. She thinks that she is entitled to do so because i worked on her idea and she paid me the salary. So she has a right to publish my work without my consent and I have no right on that work any more.

Is this true?

I have an MS in a scientific field and have published several papers in the peer-reviewed literature in that field. Three and half years ago, while still working in that field, I began a side-project (unfunded, to be worked on in my spare time) and asked for assistance on that project from a faculty member at a nearby state university and a graduate student. They saw and commented on early drafts of that manuscript and indeed, the faculty member had the initial idea for the unfunded side project, though neither the faculty member nor the graduate student (now post-doc at a different university) did any data collection nor analysis.

This manuscript has sat untouched since June of 2014. Neither the faculty member nor graduate student has asked for an update in the 3.5 years since.

I am no longer employed in the scientific field in which I received my MS, however I have continued to publish (albeit sporadically) in the peer-reviewed literature as an “independent researcher,” mostly with extant data from previous projects. I recently picked up the above-described manuscript and began working on it again, changing significant portions of the methods, results, and text. Because of the changes I have made to the manuscript, I am considering dropping the faculty member and graduate student from authorship of the manuscript and including them in the acknowledgements.

Do I owe authorship to the faculty member and graduate student that were initially coauthors but have not contributed anything to the recent development of this manuscript? The manuscript isn’t groundbreaking in the least (even in my field) but does advance the available knowledge.

Jane is doing a PhD and is supervised by Professor Mary. Mary asked Jane to put together a review article for a book based on a draft chapter from Jane’s thesis with additional suggestions from Mary. The book article was submitted with the authors listed as Jane and Mary (corresponding author). I am unsure whether this has actually been published, though it was submitted well before the now-published review by Mary.

Sometime later, Mary submitted a broader review article online which used large chunks of text and figures from the book article which were directly written/generated by Jane. Whole paragraphs were copied verbatim from the first article to Mary’s article, and many more paragraphs were slightly rewritten but contained exactly the same references and phrases from the first article. Mary’s paper did not cite the book review. Mary was listed as the sole author. Jane was not informed this review was being written, and was not asked for permission to include her figures or content from the book article, which were originally written by her for her thesis.

  1. Did Jane ‘hand over’ the rights to her written material to Mary by agreeing to submit the book article under both of their names?

  2. Should Mary have credited Jane in the article as a second author because she used exact sentences from the book article which were written by Jane?

  3. Will Jane still be able to use these (her) phrases and figures in her thesis despite not being credited on Mary’s online article?