ATTN- ARIN, ANITA Re: authorship-

[Guest guest]

hello All,

This is in response to the query put forth by both Arin and Anita.

We all know that there are situations in real life where the world does not move according to set standards.

Ethically though it may not be right, you have to accept the fact there are some people who have to be given authorship since in the beginning you have accepted as such( it happened several times in our group).But you have to weigh between the wrong doing of giving undue authorship and losing a good friend. I would prefer not losing a friend( my own opinion which was many times not approved by the rest of the group).But next time, I would be careful as to not promise authorship to that friend. As regards authorship to your seniors/Heads of departments,if your career depends on him/ her, do give authorship. But again there is no need to include his name if you feel that the person does not deserve (Academically) the authorship ( we have several papers from our group without the name of

HOD). At the most, you can acknowledge his support(!).

It is a tricky situation and you have to decide as per the existing conditions.

kunda

From: Arin Basu <arin.basu@...>"netrum " <netrum >Cc: "netrum " <netrum >Sent: Tue, 5 April, 2011 10:43:09 PMSubject: Re: authorship-

Very interesting set of documents, Kunda, and these indeed as you write, are some of the more better known issues among most researchers and research teams. However, in reality it gets a little more complex than what these tables and prescriptions or lists suggest. It is not unusual to find one or more of the named principal investigators in a research team sleep through the entire project under the pretext that they are so busy with other jobs that they cannot find time till the time of writing up the results and presentation to a journal for publication. Which is when you find high activity from them. Yet in other situations for example where the entire project is a formative activity where the project is based on outputs, the pis often sleep and snore but still have to be named on the reports (some of them may tender fake apologies), and so on. I hope you get the drift.

I guess I am seeking a lesson on the realpolitik of conducting a research project here. The question at this stage is, how does one negotiate with situations such as these? Have you ever come across a situation where working in a multiple membered team you find that some principal investigators who were named in the project perpetually sleep or do trivial work but would still demand that their names be on the authorship list? If yes, what are your strategies to deal with? (as lessons of life please throw in some suggestions about how not to lose friends and win enemies in that order, ;-), )

Would be interested to learn from your experiences.

ArinSent from my iPad

On 6/04/2011, at 1:27 AM, kunda gharpure <gharpurekunda@...> wrote:

Hello,

To make the issue more clear ( or more confusing) here is a copy of the template provided by one journal(JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACOTHREAPUETICS). It gives a fair idea of the type of contribution necessary for giving authorship.

Contributor 1

Contributor 2

Contributor 3

Contributor 4

Concepts

Design

Definition of intellectual content

Literature search

Clinical studies

Experimental studies

Data acquisition

Data analysis

Statistical analysis

Manuscript preparation

Manuscript editing

Manuscript review

Guarantor

The list of type of activity undertaken in research process is all exhaustive.

kunda