For about a decade Susan Parkhurst, who leads a developmental biology laboratory at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, served as the informal ombudsman for postdocs. She says authorship disputes were the most common problem for postdocs. "I would have someone in here complaining about authorship once a week," Parkhurst says.
Even in her own lab, authorship issues arise. Several years ago two lab members were pursuing different projects: One was characterizing a mutation, and the other had identified a gene and was working to find a mutant. "It became clear at a lab meeting that they were working on the same thing, and we had to work out who goes on with this line of research," Parkhurst says. Parkhurst felt that having two papers published would be less effective than one, but only one person could be first author. Together they worked out a solution: the person who was leaving the lab first could complete the project and receive first authorship and the other person could follow up with subsequent studies. "Everyone could walk away not overjoyed, but understanding ... it was best for the lab."
Often, Parkhurst says, disputes arise because lab members are unaware of the rules of authorship or the rules change late in the research. The best practice, she says, is to be consistent and to establish authorship guidelines ahead of time.
Some things to consider:
Will the order of authorship be determined before or after the project
is completed?
Who is primarily responsible for the project?
Will a statement indicating that two authors contributed equally to the work suffice?
Who receives higher order - the person who worked longest on a project, or the person who completed the study?
Will technicians receive authorship?
Who are the people whose contributions were necessary to complete the project?
Note: Some of these considerations came from HHMI's handbook,
Making the Right Moves: A Practical Guide to Scientific Management
Register for FREE Online Access
Subscribe to the Magazine