Dear all RG members
As we know there are some researchers those work at some universities/research institutes as a permanent job and move to other universities to do Ph.D. or research work as visiting professor, postdoc, Ph.D. student etc (temporary job).
Some of them write his affiliation as the current university and his point of view is: this is the place where the work was done.
On the other hand, some of them write his affiliation as both universities (a, b or 1, 2) and his opinion is: he has to acknowledge the permanent university as it the first place where he has grown at. In addition, in some cases, it pays his salary and fees as scholarship (in case of the Ph.D. student).
Which strategy of those mentioned above you support and why?
Regards
Gomaa
Writing affiliations of both universities (a, b or 1, 2) are the best way suited this situation. The institution of the permanent job takes a or 1.
Writing affiliations of both universities (a, b or 1, 2) are the best way suited this situation. The institution of the permanent job takes a or 1.
I will absolutely support in writing both affiliation with a footnote clearly indicating where i belong (which gives information about my identity/ position) and where i did the particular research holding a temporary position in another institute. We usually acknowledge for simple measurements done in others lab without any connection but it is always prefered to mention affiliation if i am connected with other institute with a temporary position. It will be good for both researcher (which will reflect academic carrier) as well as institutes (which are also credited). If one affiliation is removed, it will affect both, an incomplete description.
Regards
Chitra
I will support single affliction. The university from where he/she is enrolled as employee. Remaining details, from where he/she collected his/her degree(s) may be given on his/her profile.
In case of job at two different institutions, someone can show his/affliction with both institutions.
Dear Dr Nafees Mohmmad
Thanks for your contribution.
If a single institution/affiliation will be used suppose to be the current one, where the work was done. For sure no institution will allow someone to do some work and give the credit to his previous uni.
Regards
Dr. Gomaa - First, I thank you for posting a good question.
I prefer to incorporate the names of both the universities (a, b or 1, 2).
Regarding order of affiliations, the basic logic is where the major part of work was done. If the major part of work was accomplished at mother university, then first affiliation is supposed to be mother university and then the current university.
Clarification may be provided by a footnote.
Regards
Dear Prof Asit Kumar Batabyal
Thanks for your contribution. Actually, i support that and already used it during my publications.
But i included both views to my question to see if anyone support the other.
Thanks again
I support the affiliating of the current workplace only, on other hand, some universities/ institutes of origin forced those who belong to it to mention it in their publications as a prerequisite for their promotion.
I prefer the way in which the current (recent) institution is the first. Especially, when you do your research in-side-the-walls of this institution. Then, you must include your native institution unless your coauthors disagree.
My best regards to you all
I am in full support of the view of Dr. Nafees Mohammad. The primary institution affiliation is first while other affiliation can be acknowledged in the person's profile and can be updated at anytime the need arises.
Professionally, mention them all, but in order
Primary affiliation current working place
Secondary affiliation is your previous work place
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Research Papers