Loretta is spot-on. This has been peers commenting on an intractable problem, with both common sense and philosophical/ethical sensitivity. Having been excluded and included unfairly in authorship, it's been heartening that each commentator has substantially contributed to the discussion. (unlike me, I guess). Thanks Jorge for posing the dilemma.
Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 21, 2016, at 7:44 PM, Loretta Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm glad this discussion was started. I'm learning a lot from everyone's > thoughtful answers. > > -Loretta, MS student > >> On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 6:21 AM, Malcolm McCallum >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> In all my life, I have met dozens if not dozens of dozens of people who were >> left off papers and felt they belonged on the manuscript. In every case the >> situation caused problems. >> >> In all my life, I have NEVER, NOT ONE SINGLE TIME EVER, met someone who got >> irate because they were included as an author on a manuscript, period. In >> fact, I cannot recall a single time that someone held a grudge or was upset >> because they were included on a paper. It is well understood that a >> manuscript's authorship is distributed in regard to effort, but it is also >> distributed according to responsiblity. Anyone thing the 200th author on >> the Human Genome Project is remembered or targeted anymore than the 199th >> author? I doubt most people will see those names beyond the first author, >> maybe the last. >> >> When a paper goes to press, easily 90% of the responsiblity is born by the >> lead author. I get the distinct feeling there is nothing political or >> otherwise warranting concern about protecting anyone in this case. >> >> I personally feel that most people are over-whelmingly selfish/stingy with >> distribution of effort, and most guidelines are simply provided by people >> who are more concerned about other people's activity than there own. >> Further, they put way to much weight on being 10th author on a 20 author >> manuscript. >> >> IF more people concerned themselves with publishing their own papers, >> producing their own results, and actually contributing to science, then this >> entire issue would be mute. >> >> Do what you think is fair. >> >> >>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 11:19 PM, Jeff Houlahan <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Gary and all, this one's an interesting one. Your position is one I >>> have a lot of sympathy for - it's generous and gives credit where it's due. >>> What makes this tricky is that it also gives responsibility that somebody >>> might not want to accept. I know it's unlikely and not that common but >>> there may be instances where somebody would prefer not to have their name >>> on a paper where they've done enough work to warrant authorship. If my >>> name showed up on a paper without me ever being aware that it had been >>> submitted I would be a little bothered. If I read the paper and didn't >>> agree with the interpretation I would be very unhappy. That said, the idea >>> of not giving credit to somebody who deserves it just seems wrong. This is >>> a rock and a hard place. Best, Jeff Houlahan >>> >>> From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news >>> <[email protected]> on behalf of Gary Grossman >>> <[email protected]> >>> Sent: August 20, 2016 12:04 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Query on authorship >>> >>> Querido Jorge, this is a murky area of co-authorship except for one point. >>> Coauthorship is *earned* and should not be taken away because of some other >>> circumstance outside of the project responsibilities. Given that the second >>> student completed the work while they were at your institution, the simple >>> solution, given that they did indeed earn coauthorship, is to put them on >>> the paper with your institutional address. If you're worried about someone >>> contacting them then just asterisk their name and in the footnote put >>> "current address unknown". !Eso! g2 >>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Jorge A. Santiago-Blay >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Query on authorship >>>> >>>> Dear Colleagues: >>>> >>>> I am writing a small paper resulting from research done with two >>>> undergraduates many years ago (and, later on, involving several other >>>> colleagues using cutting-edge technology). As the results became obvious, >>>> both of the students agreed (orally, in person) with me that we should get >>>> the research published. As far as I remember, there was no email or letter >>>> documenting that and, there was no manuscript, only the data and the >>>> methods we were using. >>>> >>>> The problem: I have located one of the former students (now a researcher >>>> at a major research institution), who is excited about getting the >>>> research published, but not the second student. >>>> >>>> Question: How to handle the contribution (including authorship) of the >>>> other person? Here are some options I see. >>>> >>>> a. Omit the name of the person that has not been located and indicate that >>>> another person was involved in the data collection but we were hot able to >>>> locate him/her to get his/her approval to use his/her name as an author. >>>> Under these circumstances, would it be OK to name the person in the >>>> Acknowledgments? Lately, I am asking permission to do that because >>>> sometimes some people prefer to remain anonymous. >>>> >>>> b. Include the name of the person I cannot locate as an author, an act of >>>> fairness and good faith on my part. If the person does not like the idea >>>> (and the paper is published) retract the name of the person in an erratum, >>>> later on, and assume responsibility for my error. A kind colleague did >>>> that to me once and, subsequently, it has resulted a long standing >>>> collaboration (and co-authorship in many papers, with my knowledge) :) >>>> >>>> c. Nor use the data garnered by the person I cannot locate. Although I am >>>> pretty sure I am authorized by the institution to use the data, as a >>>> general personal; preference, I like to ask permission. >>>> >>>> If you have something constructive to comment, kindly direct your comments >>>> to me, [email protected] , >>>> >>>> Apologies for potential duplicate emails. >>>> >>>> Sincerely, >>>> >>>> Jorge >>>> >>>> Jorge A. Santiago-Blay, PhD >>>> blaypublishers.com >>>> >>>> 1. Positive experiences for authors of papers published in LEB >>>> http://blaypublishers.com/testimonials/ >>>> >>>> 2. Free examples of papers published in LEB: >>>> http://blaypublishers.com/category/previous-issues/. >>>> >>>> 3. Guidelines for Authors and page charges of LEB: >>>> http://blaypublishers.com/archives/ . >>>> >>>> 4. Want to subscribe to LEB? http://blaypublishers.com/subscriptions/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> http://blayjorge.wordpress.com/ >>>> http://paleobiology.si.edu/staff/individuals/santiagoblay.cfm >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Gary D. Grossman, PhD >>> Fellow, American Fisheries Soc. >>> >>> Professor of Animal Ecology >>> Warnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources >>> University of Georgia >>> Athens, GA, USA 30602 >>> >>> Website - Science, Art (G. Grossman Fine Art) and Music www.garygrossman.net >>> Blog - https://medium.com/@garydavidgrossman >>> Board of Editors - Animal Biodiversity and Conservation >>> Editorial Board - Freshwater Biology >>> Editorial Board - Ecology Freshwater Fish >>> >>> Hutson Gallery Provincetown, MA - www.hutsongallery.net/artists.html >> >> >> >> -- >> Malcolm L. McCallum >> Assistant Professor of Agriculture and Natural Resources >> Aquaculture and Water Quality Research Scientist >> School of Agriculture and Applied Sciences >> Langston University >> Langston, Oklahoma >> >> >> Link to online CV and portfolio : >> https://www.visualcv.com/malcolm-mc-callum?access=18A9RYkDGxO >> Google Scholar citation page: >> https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=lOHMjvYAAAAJ&hl=en >> Academia.edu: >> https://ui-springfield.academia.edu/MalcolmMcCallum/Analytics#/activity/overview?_k=wknchj >> Researchgate: >> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Malcolm_Mccallum/reputation?ev=prf_rep_tab >> Ratemyprofessor: http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=706874 >> >> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is >> for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential >> and privileged information. Any unauthorized >> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the >> intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy >> all copies of the original message. >> >> “Nothing is more priceless and worthy of preservation than the rich array of >> animal life with which our country has been blessed. It is a many-faceted >> treasure, of value to scholars, scientists, and nature lovers alike, and it >> forms a vital part of the heritage we all share as Americans.” >> -President Richard Nixon upon signing the Endangered Species Act of 1973 >> into law. >> >> "Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive" - Allan >> Nation >> >> 1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert >> 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss,and >> pollution. >> 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction MAY >> help restore populations. >> 2022: "Soylent Green is People!" Charleton Heston as Detective Thorn >> 2022: "People were always awful, but their was a world once, and it was >> beautiful.' Edward G. Robinson as Sol Roth. >> >> The Seven Blunders of the World (Mohandas Gandhi) >> Wealth w/o work >> Pleasure w/o conscience >> Knowledge w/o character >> Commerce w/o morality >> Science w/o humanity >> Worship w/o sacrifice >> Politics w/o principle >
