3 ms·
Thats because many PhD are just glorified technicians (same technicians we purged out of our labs doing one of the worst mistake of the last decades I believe).
by ta988 6y ago
Thats because many PhD are just glorified technicians (same technicians we purged out of our labs doing one of the worst mistake of the last decades I believe). So we get all those PhD learning 3d printing, microcontrollers, programming for creating new devices, tools and whatever else. Where for technicians it would have been a much shorter turnaround. Of course the individuals learn new (basic level) skills. But it also impedes discovery and leaves a whole category of people out of the door. In PhD I was once told I couldn't put the technician on the authors list because he was paid to do his job...
- ravel-bar-foo 6y agoThe line between scientific and non-scientific contributions can be fuzzy. One would not put the supplier of a chemical in the authors list ... unless the synthesis and distribution was done as part of a collaboration and it is the compound which makes the experiment possible. But then, there is a lot of leeway in "collaboration"
- ta988 6y agoAuthorship is a constant battle. You don't put the supplier no, but the technician that ran half of the experiments and also improved them? Of course they should be.