Timeline for I am not getting academic credit for code I have written for my PhD, when it was later used in other research. Should I complain?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 27 at 9:19 | comment | added | Quasark | Thank you, I will get what you say under serious consideration. It's not easy but, as you say, something must be done. | |
| May 27 at 2:44 | comment | added | Wolfgang Bangerth | @Quasark I've got no advice about this. Your choices are (i) to continue to be upset about the issue and not do anything about it other than complain anonymously at a forum such as this, (ii) have a plan to write a paper to address the situation, and then talk to everyone who needs to be involved to put the plan in action. Which option you want to go with is your choice. | |
| May 25 at 22:18 | comment | added | Quasark | I see your point; however, writing a paper about the code with the people that contributed to it means cooperating with PI and X as well. I wouldn't feel comfortable in writing a paper with them now, as I think that they have already misrespected me and all other contributors. They are also authors of the HSC papers, so they could have credited all people involved from the beginning. Instead, they deliberately and repeatedly decided not to do this, Also, even if we decided to write this paper together, it would take time, and more HSC papers might come out, only crediting X's paper. | |
| May 25 at 22:06 | comment | added | Wolfgang Bangerth | X only published a paper that uses the software. What I'm proposing is to write a paper about the software. Check out the papers published in JOSS. They're meant for exactly the kind of case you describe, where there are only papers that discuss certain aspects of the software, and applications, but not the software itself. | |
| May 25 at 4:14 | comment | added | Quasark | Sadly it was not evident enough in the post, but I would have expected to be asked for authorship the first time as a courtesy, I would have decline it, and then would have never expected it again, exactly as I was force by my PI to do with others on my papers. Writing a paper with the group might be difficult right now, but the problem still remains, that X's paper, including only people not from PI's group, is being cited as the main/only reference of the code, downplaying the contribution of myself and other people in PI's group that worked on the code | |
| May 25 at 1:59 | history | answered | Wolfgang Bangerth | CC BY-SA 4.0 |