Absolutely it does! The name that appears first means "first author" in an article or "Principal Investigator" in a research proposal.

I agree with Dr Amir. For this reason, ranking according to a contribution level of authors is most appropriate. In my opinion, "rule of alphabetical" of some journals is not the fair.

Yes! In my institution, when you publish an articles with more than one author the first is seen as the originator or the main brain behind the work. Second and third authors may have to explain their contributions to the work when they use that article to apply for promotion.

It matters because the first author is recognized as the real originator of the work.

It matters a lot oh, the first author is the main author that have 2 points while others have 1 points each which also depend on the institutions and their system of grading

of course

It should matter. The greatest contributor to the study earns the first authorship position as the principal investigator. The other authors follow based on the extent of their contribution to the research.

It sure matters. In academic promotion grading differs significantly but this also depends on the institution.

Yes it matters.

It’s rare that an article is authored by only one or two people anymore. In fact, the average original research paper has five authors. The growing list of collaborative research projects raises important questions regarding the author order for research manuscripts and the impact an author list has on readers’ perceptions.

With a handful of authors, a group might be inclined to create an author name list based on the amount of work contributed. What happens, though, when you have a long list of authors? It would be impractical to rank the authors by their relative contributions. Additionally, what if the authors contribute relatively equal amounts of work? Similarly, if a study was interdisciplinary (and many are these days), how can one individual’s contribution be deemed more significant than another’s?

In this article, we will quickly review a few strategies for listing authors and why the order can matter as you develop your academic career.

https://wordvice.com/journal-article-author-order/

Absolutely yes. It indicates their level of contributions

Unfortunately no set rule is followed. But usually amount of contributiin is the best way to arrive at decision....

The first author should be the person who had the original idea to write the paper and who does most of the work. As a result, he/she takes most of the credit. For example, if I am the main author, the paper will be cited as Montoneri et al. (what is called "increased visibility").

Publication records weigh heavily in hiring, funding, and promotion decisions, and departments, hiring managers, and personnel committees want to know how, and how much, a candidate contributed to a collaborative project. Often, all they have to go on is their position in the author list.

There is also the case of the corresponding author. The first author may be the corresponding author, but it could be any other members of the team who is available to communicate with the editor.

The senior author sometimes takes responsibility for writing the paper, especially when the research student has not yet learned the skills of scientific writing. The senior author then becomes the corresponding author, but should the student be the first author? Some supervisors put their students first, others put their own names first. Perhaps it should be decided on the absolute amount of time spent on the project by the student (in getting the data) and the supervisor (in providing help and in writing the paper). Or perhaps the supervisor should be satisfied with being corresponding author, regardless of time committed to the project.

Authorship credit should be based only on substantial contributions to (a) conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of data; and to (b) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and on (c) final revision of the version to be published.

Please read:

https://wordvice.com/journal-article-author-order/

The sequence of the authors' name according to their contribution.

It depends on peoples or institutions's interpretation. Some people/institutions believe that the most important author is the first while others believe that the last author is usually the supervisor and hence the most important author on that paper. still others believe that order does not matter at all.

Some adverts for jobs are still saying that to qualify for a position, you must have so many papers, a certain percentage of which you must be the sole or main author. It is clear that the scholarly community now encourages more authors than single authors

I agree with Dr.Amir. Some papers are having more than ten authors.In that case principal investigator decides the order.

Hi,

I agree that the order of author's name is essential since it reflects the contribution level of each member. The 1st author should be responsible for the core idea and organization of work and article.

Thank you so much respected scientist for the submissions.

I am grateful

A. Baidoo

Regards

Typically, the first author is the researcher who has had the initial idea and who has supported most of the work. it is also common for the last one to be the supervisor or principal investigator of the group. But this is not always the case. There are cases in which the principal investigator imposes his status and is placed first. In other cases, several articles are written from the same research, and the first position as an author changes from one to the other in a more or less consensual distribution, (when the main researcher does not impose it), even though the whole idea started from a only researcher. Other times, depending on the journal to which you want to send the work, it is sought that the first author is the researcher with more prestige, to ensure a better acceptance of the work, although he has participated very little in that research. It is also frequent the "payment of favors", putting as authors researchers who have not done anything in that particular work, or also the agreement between researchers. "I put you as an author in my work and you put me in yours".

In short, situations are so diverse that it can be very difficult to know, by the order of authors, who or who are really those who have done the work.

If it is the first paper of a young researcher, the name of the mentor should be the last. This is the principle of collegiality and competence. Young colleagues deserve an incentive.

The first researcher is responsible for research within the research team during correspondence and discussion with the responsible scientific authorities, and has more evaluation points according to the law of scientific promotions in my country.

IN pure mathematics the order of authors is pretty much always just alphabethical.

Thank you all for the insightful contributions

I also I agree that the order of author's name is essential since it reflects the contribution .

best regard

Thank you all for the wonderful contributions

Yes, the author order is important. The author order is based on their contribution to the work.