主题:【讨论】谁该成为署名作者?

浏览0 回复6 电梯直达
省部重点实验室
结帖率:
100%
关注:0 |粉丝:0
新手级: 新兵
[转注:下文转自科学网赵帅飞(这个名字好:让“帅”“飞”一会?)的博文]

讲一个实验室的故事,故事总共涉及到8个人,暂且称他们:A、B、C、D、E、F、G、H。其中:
A是实验室的PI,还是C的Supervisor。
B是法国的访问学生,他最先做这个课题,做了3个月就走人了。其间他摸索出了一些方法,获得了一些不完整的数据,然后交给了C。
C是A的博士生,B走了之后,A让C继续做B的工作。C在B的基础上,用了5个月时间,优化了实验方法,获得了一些比较理想的数据(但没有用到B的数据),写了文章然后投了出去,结果是大修改,补做实验后需要重投。这时候访问学生D来了,于是A把任务又交给了学生D,C被转到了A布置的其他任务。
D是荷兰的访问学生,D又在C的基础上,用了6个月时间,继续优化实验条件,获得了比较系统的数据(也没有用到B、C的数据),写了文章投了出去,最终文章被接收了。
E是D在荷兰的Supervisor。
F是G和H的上司,他指示G、H协助试验,并参与了试验结果的分析讨论。
G和H 都是F的research assistant, G负责材料的一项定性测试,H在初期教B、C、D怎么使用仪器。G和H都未参与文章的成稿。
被接收的文章,究竟怎么署名才算合理呢?
发表文章的实际署名顺序是:A、D、F、G、H、E,其中A既是第一作者又是通讯作者。B、C 虽然为D进行了大量实验方法和条件的探索 ,但也最终也只是牺牲品,连成为作者的资格都没有。(实际上他们应该成为作者吗?) E完全是搭便车,挂个名而已,主要是A为了加深与他的关系。
据了解,现实中很多文章的署名都不科学,甚至包括很多所谓的“牛人”。不少导师为了结盟(加强与同行的联系),似乎总喜欢加些与项目不相干人的名字。这样的“抱团”结果,表面上是多赢:学生、导师和第三方的同行,每个人都多了一篇文章,还加强了彼此之间的“合作”,背后却污染了科学的空气。也许这就是,当前除了第一作者和通讯作者,其他作者越来越不被看重的部分原因。
作者在署名时,有时候也比较困惑,署名少了,别人认为你没有合作精神;署名多了,一些不该构成作者的人也成了作者。目前,少数杂志要求明确所有作者贡献的做法,其实还是很值得倡导和推广的。
该帖子作者被版主 翠湖园2积分, 2经验,加分理由:积极讨论
为您推荐
您可能想找: 气相色谱仪(GC) 询底价
专属顾问快速对接
立即提交
可能感兴趣
省部重点实验室
结帖率:
100%
关注:0 |粉丝:0
新手级: 新兵
上面的情况有点复杂,下面几段话是引自Dr. Day著的How to write and publish a scientific paper (第5版), 就是用具体简单实例来说明如何列论文作者的,这四种情况都比较容易理解,我就不画蛇添足进行翻译了。根据下面的实例,个人觉得,上面的G、H都不应该列为论文的作者。

Defining the Order: an Example

Perhaps the following example will help clarify the level of conceptual or technical involvement that should define authorship.

Suppose that Scientist A designs a series of experiments that might result in important new knowledge, and then Scientist A tells Technician B exactly how to perform the experiments. If the experiments work out and a manuscript results, Scientist A should be the sole author, even though Technician B did all the work. (Of course, the assistance of Technician B should be recognized in the Acknowledgments.)

Now let us suppose that the above experiments do not work out. Technician B takes the negative results to Scientist A and says something like, "I think we might get this damned strain to grow if we change the incubation temperature from 24 to 37°C and if we add serum albumin to the medium." Scientist A agrees to a trial, the experiments this time yield the desired outcome, and a paper results. In this case, Scientist A and Technician B, in that order, should both be listed as authors.

Let us take this example one step further. Suppose that the experiments at 37°C and with serum albumin work, but that Scientist A perceives that there is now an obvious loose end; that is, growth under these conditions suggests that the test organism is a pathogen, whereas the previously published literature had indicated that this organism was nonpathogenic. Scientist A now asks colleague Scientist C, an expert in pathogenic microbiology, to test this organism for pathogenicity. Scientist C runs a quick test by injecting the test substance into laboratory mice in a standard procedure that any medical microbiologist would use and confirms pathogenicity. A few important sentences are then added to the manuscript, and the paper is published. Scientist A and Technician B are listed as authors; the assistance of Scientist C is noted in the Acknowledgments.

Suppose, however, that Scientist C gets interested in this peculiar strain and proceeds to conduct a series of well-planned experiments which lead to the conclusion that this particular strain is not just mouse-pathogenic, but is the long-sought culprit in certain rare human infections. Thus, two new tables of data are added to the manuscript, and the Results and Discussion are rewritten. The paper is then published listing Scientist A, Technician B, and Scientist C as authors. (A case could be made for listing Scientist C as the second author.)


翠湖园
结帖率:
100%
关注:0 |粉丝:0
新手级: 新兵
今明后
结帖率:
100%
关注:0 |粉丝:0
新手级: 新兵
gbluo324
结帖率:
100%
关注:0 |粉丝:0
新手级: 新兵
一般要参与论文写作或者实验的人才能署名,现实中许多都是挂名,甚至不知文章内容的都有。
该帖子作者被版主 hhx0502积分, 2经验,加分理由:确有此事
hugh
结帖率:
100%
关注:0 |粉丝:0
新手级: 新兵
按理来说署名的都应该是为文章形成作出贡献的人,按照贡献大小的顺序来署名了.
该帖子作者被版主 hhx0502积分, 2经验,加分理由:言之有理
翠湖园
结帖率:
100%
关注:0 |粉丝:0
新手级: 新兵
原文由 hugh(hughligq) 发表:
按理来说署名的都应该是为文章形成作出贡献的人,按照贡献大小的顺序来署名了.

按常理应当是按照对论文贡献大小的顺序来署名,但是事实往往不是这样子,单位主要领导名字要是写在后面会令其发火的,唉,世情难为啊
猜你喜欢最新推荐热门推荐更多推荐
品牌合作伙伴