My questions regards the format of citation. For the context: I am a student, presenting my work (with slides) and referring to the publications in which I am co-author (never in the first three authors).

It would be nice for my name to explicitely appear, as I also refer to other publications in which I did not take part.However I do not want to list all the authors (more than 10 for some papers).

Should I use (recommendeed by my advisor):

A.Smith, M.Myself et al. "Marvelous publication"


A.Smith et al. (including M.Myself), "Marvelous publication"

My concern is not to appear as being the second author, which would feel like a lie, while keeping a compact formatting.

Is there a common way of doing this ?

Thank you.

  • 3
    Including your academic field might be helpful. – chrylis -on strike- Jun 7 '18 at 15:16
  • 4
    I have often seen "A. Smith, ..., M. Myself, et al. 2018, Nature" – rhombidodecahedron Jun 12 '18 at 18:41
  • 1
    I hope you presented this choice to your advisor and your reasons for not preferring option A. If he/she still thinks it is advisable for your field it probably is, unless your advisor is relatively inexperienced. – Buffy Sep 20 '18 at 13:54

For a presentation I would use @Jan Kukacka's answer. Say in the presentation "This work was published in our 2015 paper".

For a resume you've four options as I see it:

  • List all the authors (put yourself in bold).
  • List the first x authors (where 10 is a common value of x) then put et al (several journals/funding bodies use this format). Choose x so your name always appears
  • List all the authors up to and including your name, and then put et al.
  • List just the first author. As the papers will probably appear in a publications section on your resume, its fairly clear that you are going to be an author.

Which ever you choose, it might be worth including a very short sentence that described your role in the work.


I was recently facing the same struggle. For the purpose of a resume, I decided to write the full list of authors.

A presentation is a bit different matter: it does not give you so much space for text, but you can say a lot more. In this case, I would refer to the papers on the slides the usual way:

First Author et al., 2015: Marvelous publication,

potentially mentioning in the spoken narrative that you are one of the co-authors (since your question gives a hint that this is a part of the message you want to deliver), and possibly including a slide with the full reference list to the end of the presentation (which you won't use during the actual talk but is handy for anyone looking at the slides later).

  • 4
    Yeah in a presentation you can say "... this was published in our 2015 pulblication "A treatise on why the fourth author is wonderful". – Ian Sudbery Jun 7 '18 at 8:48

Another option is to omit the authors between the first author and your position:

First Author, [...], Your Name, et al., 2015: Marvelous publication`

But I would only recommend this in scenarios where it is important to highlight your participation to these publications, e.g. reports for your PhD progress or similar.


I just put 'co-author' of. Sometimes people care about which co-author, such as "Second co-author' of. This is for a non-academic job, and when the employer just wants to know you published. However, if they actually would probably care about the published work, cite it as a reference, just like the answers above.


I sticked to the Smith et al. scheme but used a different text color for papers I co-authored together with an explanatory sentence at the beginning.

protected by Alexandros Sep 20 '18 at 16:22

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.