Timeline for What is a good scheme to determine percentage contributions to a paper
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 7, 2015 at 7:15 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackAcademia/status/596211800624013313 | ||
| May 6, 2015 at 12:38 | comment | added | Tobias Kildetoft | @Miguel Being true does not prevent something from being made up :) | |
| May 6, 2015 at 12:37 | comment | added | Miguel | @TobiasKildetoft At which point it would automatically become false. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 12:10 | comment | added | Tobias Kildetoft | @Floris One of the few things that might become true if repeated often enough. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 12:06 | comment | added | Floris | @MarcClaesen 93% of statistics are made up on the spot... | |
| May 6, 2015 at 11:38 | comment | added | skymningen | The only fair way to do this is to have all authors sit together and figure it out. Yes, this can result in very awful situations, but it can also facilitate a PI explaining how much background work they he or she did or even explaining an insecure grad student, how much important work they did. Of course, if the atmosphere is loaded between some of the authors, this could end horrible. On the other hand, in that case there is nothing you can do to prevent them fighting over the decision in the end. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 11:29 | answer | added | Stephan Kolassa | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 6, 2015 at 11:21 | comment | added | Stephan Kolassa | @MarcClaesen: thank you. Now I'll sleep better tonight. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 11:20 | comment | added | Marc Claesen | @StephanKolassa I am 18% serious (95% CI [12%-25%]). | |
| May 6, 2015 at 11:19 | comment | added | Stephan Kolassa | @MarcClaesen: you are joking, right? Please tell me you are. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 11:18 | comment | added | Marc Claesen | I think percentages are bad practice, confidence intervals are much better. Or p-values with null hypothesis that the piece each author worked on could've been produced by a random monkey. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 10:24 | comment | added | Miguel | @StrongBad Whether it sounds awful or not this is what they do, and I cannot change it. Given that fact, I am looking for the most fair way to quantify how much each author contributed, so that, for instance, publication bonuses are distributed as fairly as possible. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 10:10 | comment | added | Moriarty | Use the money to buy flaming torches and pitchforks, storm the administration building, and toss the policy into a paper shredder. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 10:06 | comment | added | StrongBad | This sounds awful. Don't let the bean counters win. | |
| May 6, 2015 at 10:01 | history | asked | Miguel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |