6 ms·

Usually who ever is in charge of the lab gets the credit for any discoveries. You never hear much about undergrads making discoveries because the professor's n

Usually who ever is in charge of the lab gets the credit for any discoveries. You never hear much about undergrads making discoveries because the professor's name goes on the paper. I wonder why this article keeps appearing everywhere. I'm not sure why they're allowing the student to get the credit. Maybe it's a feel-good-encourage-STEM piece.

jagger27 7y ago
Planet discoveries have historically gone to those who first laid eyes on it. I don’t see how this would be any different, and they should get to name it.
- kbenson 7y ago
  That's a good way to get a star named Starry McStarface, if that name is not already taken. I wholeheartedly endorse this, and the idea of a human originated intelligence eventually exploring a system with a name/designation like that brings a smile to my face.
  - yesenadam 7y ago
    >>Planet discoveries have historically gone to those who first laid eyes on it. >That's a good way to get a star named Starry McStarface Huh? I thought that was from voting, i.e. democracy : "The Boaty McBoatface saga is not the first time online polls have gone awry. Greenpeace launched a campaign to name a humpback whale in the South pacific in an attempt to keep them from being poached by the Japanese. The poll prompted a voting frenzy after Mr Splashy Pants was put forward – and ended up winning 78% of the vote. Similarly in 2012, soft drinks brand Mountain Dew was forced to abandon a poll to name its new apple-flavoured drink after it was hijacked by message board 4chan who ensured that “Hitler did nothing wrong” won the vote. The city of Austin, Texas, also learned the perils of public voting after a poll to rename the Solid Waste Services Department ended up with an overwhelming number of votes to call it The Fred Durst Society of the Humanities and Arts as an ode to the Limp Bizkit singer." https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/17/boaty-mcboatface-wins-poll-to-name-polar-research-vessel https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/17/boaty-mc...
    - kbenson 7y ago
      Yes, it was from voting, but I would say that it's from people that don't have a reputation to protect given some authority and choosing to exercise it to maximize some other value they hold, and the context I was reading the comments in (if not necessarily so much this thread) is that random people can still have an impact on finding new stars and naming them. All it takes is someone that values 5 minutes of internet fame (or even just a joke to share with friends) over any respect of the scientific community. The easier it is to find a new star, the more likely I think that will be the case.
dfee 7y ago
Uh, fuck that? Seriously, why not the group that funded the research, or society at large? “You don’t get the credit, because I enabled you to find it, so I get to claim it as mine.” At best, that person should be a note in the colophon. And if the rewards structure is broken so the lab manager isn’t viewed as “doing his job” if his name isn’t on enough breakthroughs - specifically because the people he oversees the hiring and firing of are instead getting the credit - then /that/ is broken. What’s not broken is crediting a teenager for finding something interesting. And, to be fair, it’s only really interesting because he (a teenager with no experience) found it. So I’m even more concerned that the parent comment reflects science professionals’ insecurity.
- 93po 7y ago
  To be fair, the interns and undergrads are doing what they're told. They're under the direction of someone telling them what to do. It's those instructions that led to the discovery.
  - dfee 7y ago
    In that case, I extend my sympathies to the manager’s ego. And to be clear, I’m unaware of whether in this particular situation, the manager’s ego was bruised. So, I’m speaking to the general case where egos are bruised. The payout to an effective manager here is that his/her managed employees are empowered by his/her ability to empower them, and that’s his/her rocket-fuel. He/she runs an amazing team, which everyone wants to be a part of - and that stands on its own. Alternatively, demoralize the employees you manage at your own peril. I’ve watched both situations play out plenty of times. And, for better or worse, have been on both sides of that conversation. Selflessness and championing of your team over yourself has a funny way of translating to improved morale, success and longevity.
currymj 7y ago
I think it would be very unethical for an undergraduate who contributed to a research effort not to be listed as an author. normally the professor's name goes last on the paper, and the convention is well understood that being last author means they functioned in an advisory/funding role and may not have done much of the actual work. there's plenty to be cynical about in the world of scientific research but it's definitely not the norm for professors to claim sole credit for work done by their students or employees.
- toyg 7y ago
  Most of the stories I’ve heard from people I know who used to be in the sector (mother, brother, ex-wife, friends...) don’t match your perception. This is in Europe, but still: credit is hard currency in that world and people can be pretty cut-throat about it.
  - mam2 7y ago
    European research is considered less cutthroat at least in my experience.
  - currymj 7y ago
    People can be cutthroat about trying to get their name on papers to which they contributed little, and they may be reluctant to discuss work too openly with others lest the discussion be construed as a collaboration which would require coauthorship. But I think leaving people off the paper who made some contribution is really frowned upon at least in the US.
sevencolors 7y ago
It's great PR. And it worked as evidenced by the amount of times I've seen this story pop up
interestica 7y ago
Def a feel-good piece. And I found it particularly strange that every article I've seen includes the "6.9 times the size of Earth" in the title as if the bigger the planet the better. I'd be more impressed by the number of times smaller than earth it might have been....

jagger27 7y ago

Planet discoveries have historically gone to those who first laid eyes on it. I don’t see how this would be any different, and they should get to name it.

kbenson 7y ago
That's a good way to get a star named Starry McStarface, if that name is not already taken. I wholeheartedly endorse this, and the idea of a human originated intelligence eventually exploring a system with a name/designation like that brings a smile to my face.
- yesenadam 7y ago
  >>Planet discoveries have historically gone to those who first laid eyes on it. >That's a good way to get a star named Starry McStarface Huh? I thought that was from voting, i.e. democracy : "The Boaty McBoatface saga is not the first time online polls have gone awry. Greenpeace launched a campaign to name a humpback whale in the South pacific in an attempt to keep them from being poached by the Japanese. The poll prompted a voting frenzy after Mr Splashy Pants was put forward – and ended up winning 78% of the vote. Similarly in 2012, soft drinks brand Mountain Dew was forced to abandon a poll to name its new apple-flavoured drink after it was hijacked by message board 4chan who ensured that “Hitler did nothing wrong” won the vote. The city of Austin, Texas, also learned the perils of public voting after a poll to rename the Solid Waste Services Department ended up with an overwhelming number of votes to call it The Fred Durst Society of the Humanities and Arts as an ode to the Limp Bizkit singer." https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/17/boaty-mcboatface-wins-poll-to-name-polar-research-vessel https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/17/boaty-mc...
  - kbenson 7y ago
    Yes, it was from voting, but I would say that it's from people that don't have a reputation to protect given some authority and choosing to exercise it to maximize some other value they hold, and the context I was reading the comments in (if not necessarily so much this thread) is that random people can still have an impact on finding new stars and naming them. All it takes is someone that values 5 minutes of internet fame (or even just a joke to share with friends) over any respect of the scientific community. The easier it is to find a new star, the more likely I think that will be the case.

dfee 7y ago

Uh, fuck that? Seriously, why not the group that funded the research, or society at large? “You don’t get the credit, because I enabled you to find it, so I get to claim it as mine.” At best, that person should be a note in the colophon. And if the rewards structure is broken so the lab manager isn’t viewed as “doing his job” if his name isn’t on enough breakthroughs - specifically because the people he oversees the hiring and firing of are instead getting the credit - then /that/ is broken. What’s not broken is crediting a teenager for finding something interesting. And, to be fair, it’s only really interesting because he (a teenager with no experience) found it. So I’m even more concerned that the parent comment reflects science professionals’ insecurity.

93po 7y ago
To be fair, the interns and undergrads are doing what they're told. They're under the direction of someone telling them what to do. It's those instructions that led to the discovery.
- dfee 7y ago
  In that case, I extend my sympathies to the manager’s ego. And to be clear, I’m unaware of whether in this particular situation, the manager’s ego was bruised. So, I’m speaking to the general case where egos are bruised. The payout to an effective manager here is that his/her managed employees are empowered by his/her ability to empower them, and that’s his/her rocket-fuel. He/she runs an amazing team, which everyone wants to be a part of - and that stands on its own. Alternatively, demoralize the employees you manage at your own peril. I’ve watched both situations play out plenty of times. And, for better or worse, have been on both sides of that conversation. Selflessness and championing of your team over yourself has a funny way of translating to improved morale, success and longevity.

currymj 7y ago

I think it would be very unethical for an undergraduate who contributed to a research effort not to be listed as an author. normally the professor's name goes last on the paper, and the convention is well understood that being last author means they functioned in an advisory/funding role and may not have done much of the actual work. there's plenty to be cynical about in the world of scientific research but it's definitely not the norm for professors to claim sole credit for work done by their students or employees.

toyg 7y ago
Most of the stories I’ve heard from people I know who used to be in the sector (mother, brother, ex-wife, friends...) don’t match your perception. This is in Europe, but still: credit is hard currency in that world and people can be pretty cut-throat about it.
- mam2 7y ago
  European research is considered less cutthroat at least in my experience.
- currymj 7y ago
  People can be cutthroat about trying to get their name on papers to which they contributed little, and they may be reluctant to discuss work too openly with others lest the discussion be construed as a collaboration which would require coauthorship. But I think leaving people off the paper who made some contribution is really frowned upon at least in the US.

sevencolors 7y ago

It's great PR. And it worked as evidenced by the amount of times I've seen this story pop up

interestica 7y ago

Def a feel-good piece. And I found it particularly strange that every article I've seen includes the "6.9 times the size of Earth" in the title as if the bigger the planet the better. I'd be more impressed by the number of times smaller than earth it might have been....