4 ms·

Above board, perhaps. This way of researching and publish does, OTOH, mean something quite different from science of the past. This isn't applying the method m

Above board, perhaps. This way of researching and publish does, OTOH, mean something quite different from science of the past. This isn't applying the method more efficiently. It's applying a different method. Reading old papers, you know who they were written by. These days, authorship doesn't mean that anymore. It's more like credits in a movie than a signature on a painting.

blacksmith_tb 4y ago
Don't the credits on a movie imply active participation too? I'd say a closer analogy might be an attendance roll...
- moate 4y ago
  I feel like a supervisor who just signed off on things while not “getting his hands dirty” had as much effect on the final paper as craft services does on the final film: not 0, but not really an equal peer.
  - psyklic 4y ago
    The supervisor typically has a major hand in choosing a productive research direction. Asking the "right" questions often is what makes research valuable! Also, the supervisor's name is typically last on the paper, and it's clear this is their role.
NegativeLatency 4y ago
The nice thing about credits compared to authors is that credits generally have a title/role/position associated with the name. (A grip does a very different job than a costume designer, but with a paper they're all just authors which has a different meaning than say "research director")
- jarvist 4y ago
  It's certainly not perfect (still a bit coarse, doesn't state what % of the work is done, doesn't state which parts of the paper the author worked on), but CRediT statements are gaining increasing traction in the published literature: https://credit.niso.org/ https://credit.niso.org/
- screature2 4y ago
  For scientific papers, depending on the field, order of listing actually is some indication of role. I think the convention in bio research is 1st author is the primary creator of the experiment and paper while last author is the lab PI. Per this science.org column, that seems typical across a number of scientific disciplines. https://www.science.org/content/article/how-navigate-authorship-scientific-manuscripts?cookieSet=1#:~:text=Typically%20in%20my%20field%2C%20the,person%20responsible%20for%20the%20project https://www.science.org/content/article/how-navigate-authors....
  - the_snooze 4y ago
    It’s the same in my field (CS: security and privacy). The most senior people tend to be in the end of the list. The first author is typically a student/postdoc who did the technical leadership on the work, and they get the benefit of getting their name out there in the shorthand citation (“AuthorName, S&P ‘23”).
  - rolph 4y ago
    yes this has been, and continues to be the case from my perspective, for at least the last 50 years.

blacksmith_tb 4y ago

Don't the credits on a movie imply active participation too? I'd say a closer analogy might be an attendance roll...

moate 4y ago
I feel like a supervisor who just signed off on things while not “getting his hands dirty” had as much effect on the final paper as craft services does on the final film: not 0, but not really an equal peer.
- psyklic 4y ago
  The supervisor typically has a major hand in choosing a productive research direction. Asking the "right" questions often is what makes research valuable! Also, the supervisor's name is typically last on the paper, and it's clear this is their role.

NegativeLatency 4y ago

The nice thing about credits compared to authors is that credits generally have a title/role/position associated with the name. (A grip does a very different job than a costume designer, but with a paper they're all just authors which has a different meaning than say "research director")

jarvist 4y ago
It's certainly not perfect (still a bit coarse, doesn't state what % of the work is done, doesn't state which parts of the paper the author worked on), but CRediT statements are gaining increasing traction in the published literature: https://credit.niso.org/ https://credit.niso.org/
screature2 4y ago
For scientific papers, depending on the field, order of listing actually is some indication of role. I think the convention in bio research is 1st author is the primary creator of the experiment and paper while last author is the lab PI. Per this science.org column, that seems typical across a number of scientific disciplines. https://www.science.org/content/article/how-navigate-authorship-scientific-manuscripts?cookieSet=1#:~:text=Typically%20in%20my%20field%2C%20the,person%20responsible%20for%20the%20project https://www.science.org/content/article/how-navigate-authors....
- the_snooze 4y ago
  It’s the same in my field (CS: security and privacy). The most senior people tend to be in the end of the list. The first author is typically a student/postdoc who did the technical leadership on the work, and they get the benefit of getting their name out there in the shorthand citation (“AuthorName, S&P ‘23”).
- rolph 4y ago
  yes this has been, and continues to be the case from my perspective, for at least the last 50 years.