Timeline for Is authorship justified for performing an experiment 7 years ago, which is published? We just used samples from that experiment for a new analysis
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 1, 2022 at 12:23 | comment | added | cbeleites | +1 for pointing out that it can be very hard to judge "old" intellectual contributions. In particular, someone may do an experiment as part of their project and as a side line develop an idea of an additional line of research which may be followed with those samples or data. Thus having an intellectual contribution to the outline of a project that someone else get to work on years later. This would be one scenario where OP doesn't know about an intellectual contribution that has actually happened, but their supervisor does. | |
| Apr 30, 2022 at 6:07 | comment | added | Amanda | I do not know where you get the assumption from that I underestimate mouse work and do not appreciate the work done. | |
| Apr 29, 2022 at 19:13 | comment | added | Ian | This answer hits all the points: the question author is unlikely to be able to judge objectively, they lose very little from acquiescing, fighting with their supervisor over a questionable issue will sour relations necessarily, and, critically, mouse work is really hard and should not be undersold. | |
| Apr 29, 2022 at 17:23 | comment | added | Carol | In any case, does the OP want an advisor who supports crediting her former group members when the group uses their samples or not? When OP leaves there also will be projects where he has left samples or results that may be further tweaked into minor supporting pieces in future group pubs. Just because a group member leaves and the current members don't remember him isn't a reason to treat his old samples as 'public domain' within the group. I think the advisor is showing by example how to do things right. (+1 @BryanKrause answer because it notes that the OP is underselling the prior work) | |
| Apr 29, 2022 at 17:14 | comment | added | Bryan Krause♦ | @Carol Probably it would, yes. | |
| Apr 29, 2022 at 16:57 | comment | added | Carol | The supplemental figure seemed to require the existing samples prepared by the former student ( so it seems to me the the supplemental figure was not based simply on reanalysis of public data in prior paper.) I assume that asking some other group to send their old samples for reanalysis would include discussion of co-authorship. | |
| Apr 29, 2022 at 15:38 | history | answered | Bryan Krause♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |