4 ms·

So what's going on here? It seems fraudulent but also "published paper" and "authorship" seems to be poorly defined terms with no clear consensus on what it mea

So what's going on here? It seems fraudulent but also "published paper" and "authorship" seems to be poorly defined terms with no clear consensus on what it means

idealmedtech 4y ago
When you get a certain level of academic inertia (tons of postdocs under you etc), you get author credit even when you don't actively participate in the research or writing itself. What's more interesting is how many first author papers are published per year, per author. First author is typically reserved for someone who did a significant amount of the work on the paper.
- rjmunro 4y ago
  But sometimes it is reserved for the person whose name happens to come first in the alphabet: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/05/29/alphabetical-name-ordering-is-discriminatory-and-harmful-to-collaborations/ https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/05/29/al...
- jonnycomputer 4y ago
  But determining first authorship itself is non-trivial, as different fields and different journals have different conventions and norms.
  - idealmedtech 4y ago
    Yep, not to mention many groups will list new members higher up so they get cred faster
SiempreViernes 4y ago
Basically its mostly people in powerful positions that use their power to convert minor contributions to paper credit. There's a list of self reported reasons how they achieve this seemingly high productivity, and the most honest bit is probably: * mentorship of very many young researchers * leadership of a research team, or even of many teams * extensive collaboration * working on multiple research areas or in core services * availability of suitable extensive resources and data * culmination of a large project with the latter points giving more transient productivity.
jonp888 4y ago
Here's a quick guide: https://phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=562 https://phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=562
- Maken 4y ago
  This is painfully accurate.

So what's going on here? It seems fraudulent but also "published paper" and "authorship" seems to be poorly defined terms with no clear consensus on what it means

idealmedtech 4y ago

When you get a certain level of academic inertia (tons of postdocs under you etc), you get author credit even when you don't actively participate in the research or writing itself. What's more interesting is how many first author papers are published per year, per author. First author is typically reserved for someone who did a significant amount of the work on the paper.

rjmunro 4y ago
But sometimes it is reserved for the person whose name happens to come first in the alphabet: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/05/29/alphabetical-name-ordering-is-discriminatory-and-harmful-to-collaborations/ https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2018/05/29/al...
jonnycomputer 4y ago
But determining first authorship itself is non-trivial, as different fields and different journals have different conventions and norms.
- idealmedtech 4y ago
  Yep, not to mention many groups will list new members higher up so they get cred faster

SiempreViernes 4y ago

Basically its mostly people in powerful positions that use their power to convert minor contributions to paper credit. There's a list of self reported reasons how they achieve this seemingly high productivity, and the most honest bit is probably: * mentorship of very many young researchers * leadership of a research team, or even of many teams * extensive collaboration * working on multiple research areas or in core services * availability of suitable extensive resources and data * culmination of a large project with the latter points giving more transient productivity.

jonp888 4y ago

Here's a quick guide: https://phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=562 https://phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=562

Maken 4y ago
This is painfully accurate.