Dear colleagues,
Is it better for a scientist to publish as first author or no?
Definitely so but you should be the major contributor. No one should be the first author with insignificant contribution or forcing others to put the name as the first author.
Dear Subir
Yes of course he should be of major contribution. But ils it better than publishing as co author?
I agree to Prof. Subir response. The first author should have contributed more. The order of authors is important. Commonly, third author or more do not contribute much. Some people insist to put as co-author if they do a small part of experiment. In some University departments or reseach labs, the head of the institution or lab forces to put his name in every paper irrespective of the contribution. In some cases, supervisors force their scholars to put their name as first author. Generally, first author is the major contributor than co-authors and carry more credits. I have also noticed single author papers from some scientists in my reseach field.
Yes if you are the sole contributor you can publish alone. In case of multidisciplinary studies there would definitely be coauthors.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publisher