Last year I did some work to help out my friend and his supervisor on a project that they were working on. I wasn't very involved with the project, but the work that I contributed was important for them to be able to find the main results that they were interested in. I asked at the time if they would they be happy to include me as an author on the paper based on this contribution, and they said they would be happy to do that.
I think it's quite likely that the paper might not get very many citations. The most closely related paper to the one they will publish soon was written by my friend's supervisor, and it has only one citation. It was published in 2015, and I think it's in an area that doesn't have so much research interest in general.
I've been wondering what different people think about whether being an author on this work would look better or worse for me, with respect to future positions in academia. I'm hoping to look for a postdoctoral position in the near future, in a different but related field.
I feel like it might look better: I would have more publications and it's showing more of my skills. I could put it on my CV. Or it might look worse: I know there are different metrics which take into consideration how many citations papers have, and having a paper with no citations might reduce my score on them.
I'm currently at the end of my PhD and I have 6 publications, one has 4 citations and the rest have between 10 and 25. I think at this point it would be reasonable to ask them to include me only as an acknowledgement on the paper, if I decided that was the best option for me.
Any opinions/perspectives on this appreciated. I appreciate that it's my choice whether I put the paper on my CV or not, if I choose to stay as an author.
Thanks