Generally, the actual worker working in any experiment or the worker having the highest contribution in the research or writing of the article is considered as the first author of the article.
In many journals, all the names after the first three (3), five (5), or six (6) authors are together written as et al. during referencing.
Is it true that all et al. authors are always having a contribution to the research/ preparation of article?
Is it logical to consider anybody as an expert or even a worker of any field of research who is not even a SINGLE publication as the first author and in all of the publications, s/he is under the category of ‘et al.’?
Or, the ‘first author’ should get preference in such cases?
Dear Shibabrata Pattanayak Sir, you have raised an important issue. To the best of my knowledge, anybody who has no contribution to the making of the research paper should not be included as an author. By virtue of having expertise in the field of research, s/he is not eligible as an author of a manuscript if s/he has not contributed to the preparation of the paper. I am fully aware of the issue you have pointed out that many authors are in the habit of including anonymous experts as an author for popularity and easy publication of the papers (without any contribution). In fact, such practice is detrimental to the proper research and against the research ethics. Another issue is the Article Processing Charges (APC). Many authors who are unable to pay the APC are looking out to include the experts as an author for the relaxation of APCs. In my personal opinion, such a practice is improper. So, I appeal to authors to refrain from such practice and if it is really essential then get the manuscript reviewed by the supposed author expert once before including s/he as an author.
The importance depends on the field. There are research fields, where who is first author is considered important, others where it isn’t and still others where to highlight that it isn’t important, strict alphabetical ordering is used.
What should be kept in mind, however-which, unfortunately, isn't, always, the case-is that the author list is distinct from the content of the paper and it's the content that should be of much more relevance than the ordering of the author list.
Who appears in which place on the author list is far less important than what the paper is about. The author list is about sociology-the content of the paper is what's of any real interest.
Dear Shibabrata Pattanayak thank you for this interesting technical question. In fact, many RG members seem to be very interested in questions around first author and corresponding author etc. for example, please see this closely related RG thread entitled
Is first author's value the same as correspondence author?
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_first_authors_value_the_same_as_correspondence_author
We always handle this question in that way that the first author is the student who did the most important part of the work. In your discipline it is normally the synthesis of new chemical compounds. The supervisor (= me) who conceived the research, provided lab space, chemicals and money, and wrote the manuscript is the corresponding author. As the work is normally part of one of our long-running research projects, the paper is cited as "Edelmann et al.", not "student et al."
For more general information about the role of first authors in research papers please see this instructive link entitled
Deciding the order of authors on a paper
https://www.editage.com/insights/deciding-the-order-of-authors-on-a-paper
Hi @Shibabrata Pattanayak. Interesting point you have raised. I agree with @Gibji Nimasow there could such cases. But what I feel second author or any subsequent authors do they contributions and that shall be acknowledged and honored.
Regards
In a publication of multiple authors, the first author did most of the work. The co-authors helped in editing and refining the manuscript. However, in some fields, co-authors' names might be ordered alphabetically. The following could be an insightful read.
What is the role of the third author in international publications? (2019, September 20). Editage Insights. https://www.editage.com/insights/what-is-the-role-of-third-author-in-international-publications-is-the-third-author-given-more-importance-than-2nd-author
Best.
Dear all,
generally I don't like the "et al." usage. Many people use it to mention the group leader and the "et al." as his/her students. But nowadays many projects are connected to several/many groups.
A nice example is the following one: The young and independent group leader was the corresponding author and his student did most of the work in the lab for this article. But there are complicated calculation from another group, an x-ray structure, data from the Beam Line and some other methods.... None of the other group leader/professors is a student of the corresponding author ;).
Article α-Aminoxy Oligopeptides: Synthesis, Secondary Structure, and...
If I am forced (by the journal style) to use et al.; I always use the: "first author et al." method. That is quit simple and if the references are given in an alphabetical sort order the reference is easy to find.
BR
Guido
Dear Shibabrata Pattanayak , I have taken par in many different discussion, involving the issue of authorship. I do hope that this links, so many good contributions and resources will help in your research.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Who_is_a_REAL-AUTHOR_in_scientific_article
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Are_all_Authors_Author
https://www.researchgate.net/post/View_of_papers_with_multiple_co-first_authors
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_you_think_that_the_contribution_of_the_first_author_of_a_scientific_paper_should_be_evaluated_more_than_coauthors_contributions
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Who-would-be-the-author-of-an-article-in-a-journal-the-corresponding-author-or-the-first-author-name
It implies that he/she made the most contribution to the research being presented.
The first author, in principle, does most parts of the work- from data collection to analyses. However, this is not followed in many places, particularly in many African countries even where the investigator finances the whole expenses on the project without external funding, only to be supervised by an experienced investigator who hijacks the publication for his/her own academic growth. In facts, it is common that those supervisors would even publish the work adding their friends' names who did not participate in the studies and may even decide who get published or not, not to talk of even placing their names as first authors. On the other hands, in many developed worlds even on most occasions, the PIs might have won a grant before looking for an investigator (doctoral or post-doctoral researcher) who eventually carries out the project and listed as the first author. To the question, as earlier mentioned, the unwritten rule is now the norm globally, but I hope we can imbibe the idea of following the authors' contribution statement than the listing.
Another option: I have seen an author list with a footnote indicating that alphabetical order was used and that the authors contributed equally.
Like my institution, First authors or corresponding authors are given 5 points during appraisal
Dear collegues
The first author is a student who prepare its doctorat, but in many cases, the first author didn ot contribut a lot, So, is the second (or the third if the second is also a student) who have concupted, elaborated, written and done the majority of the work. Many supervisor reserchers rerquest co-supervisor thesis (scond authors ) to suport their students to get rapidly their doctorat, but this is not very well for the students skills, and for identifying experts in such field. This is an ethetical problem, which affect negatively the scientific research
Ouasri Ali
The first author is the one who made the major contribution (Formal analysis and Writing). an Author Contribution Statements provided with the paper is fair enough for the different contributor.
Dear Karl Pfeifer brought the alfabetical order of authors to this research question. "Certain fields, particularly those involving large group projects, employ other methods. For example, high-energy particle physics teams list authors alphabetically."
Furthermore, Multiple “first” authors issue exist. "Additional “first” authors can be noted by an asterisk or other symbol accompanied by an explanatory note. This practice is common in interdisciplinary studies; however, the first name listed on a paper will still enjoy more visibility than any other “first” author..."
https://wordvice.com/journal-article-author-order/
The authors wish it to be known that, in their opinion, the first three authors should be regarded as joint first authors. The order of co-first authors provided here was decided through a mushroom picking competition around the Sognsvann lake, Oslo, Norway. Co-first authors can prioritise their names when adding this paper's reference to their résumés...
https://academic.oup.com/nar/advance-article/doi/10.1093/nar/gkab1113/6446529#316561034
generally it is that the one who had the idea of the paper and the one who was in charge of formulating it
Every Author as First Author
We propose a new standard for writing author names on papers and in bibliographies, which places every author as a first author -- superimposed. This approach enables authors to write papers as true equals, without any advantage given to whoever's name happens to come first alphabetically (for example). We develop the technology for implementing this standard in LaTeX, BibTeX, and HTML; show several examples; and discuss further advantages...
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.01393.pdf
Teamwork is a key component of research. It is impossible to accomplish goals just on your own. Directly or indirectly, all living and nonliving objects aid us in doing so. As a result, it is our responsibility to give each aspect equal weight. A basic tenet of life is that anything we offer will be returned to us in the same way.
- Badges
- Science topic