Timeline for How to explain to a student that it is common to include a supervisor as a co-author?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:49 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://academia.stackexchange.com/ with https://academia.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Sep 24, 2015 at 20:04 | comment | added | Fomite | This. If the supervisor should be an author on the paper, it should be self-evident based on standard authorship guidelines. | |
| Sep 24, 2015 at 12:01 | comment | added | StrongBad | @TobiasKildetoft consortium authorship rules are the most different I have seen. That said many societies/journals have slightly different policies. I think of them, like open sours software licenses, as being generally the same, but the people who care about these things care about the edges. | |
| Sep 24, 2015 at 8:44 | comment | added | Tobias Kildetoft | @Wrzlprmft I did see the other question, but it does not actually explicitly mention which journal (which I guess made me mentally write it off as not a proper journal though of course I have no way to know). For the journal you link, they are a bit vague, since it only mentions when the junior person is a coauthor (i.e. not the sole author), though it does seem to assume that no junior researcher would write something without a supervisor. | |
| Sep 24, 2015 at 8:39 | comment | added | Wrzlprmft♦ | @TobiasKildetoft: This question mentions such a journal. Also, I recently learnt about a journal having comparable guidelines (they request a professor as a corresponding author). | |
| Sep 24, 2015 at 8:36 | comment | added | Tobias Kildetoft | @O.R.Mapper As I said, "to the effect", by which I mean proposing a convention that disagrees with the Vancouver protocol, not necessarily mentioning that protocol directly. | |
| Sep 24, 2015 at 8:12 | comment | added | O. R. Mapper | @TobiasKildetoft: "any official statement from someone to the effect that they do not wish to follow the Vancouver protocol" - that might be connected to the circumstance (issue?) that those who follow a different set of somewhat agreed-upon conventions simply will not mention the Vancouver protocol. Throughout my whole time in academia, I have never heard about the Vancouver protocol, neither from conference organizers, nor from other researchers - the only way I am familiar with it is because "some people on the internet (read: users on Academia SE) mentioned it". | |
| Sep 24, 2015 at 7:22 | comment | added | Tobias Kildetoft | I would be very interested in an example of either, as I have so far not seen any official statement from someone to the effect that they do not wish to follow the Vancouver protocol (whereas I have on this site seen that it is very common in some fields to have some very different customs of what merits coauthorship than what is stated there). | |
| Sep 23, 2015 at 20:11 | history | answered | StrongBad | CC BY-SA 3.0 |