I joined a research group of a faculty member in 201x, and worked with her for three years. During that time, I collaborated with a large hospital to perform research in the domain of medical informatics. I spoke about my research at two conferences; one was a talk, and the other was a poster presentation. My advisor asked me to write up the research in a paper around the second year, which I did. Around the third year, I decided to switch research groups, because of the relationship between me and my advisor going sour, and not having funding from her (I used to work part-time to fund my PhD research).

Once this happened, she withdrew her support from me publishing my paper and ordered that I give up my work to a fellow grad student. I told her, that my manuscript is in its Nth revision, and that I would like to take it to completion as first author. She was dismissive and didn’t offer any comments on my work. I told her, that, should I pass on my work, I would like to discuss authorship issues in advance, which she wasn’t ready to discuss. She ganged up my new advisor against me, and together they forced me to give up my code, results, paper drafts. I had to then leave the university without a degree.

Fast forward couple of years, I receive an email from a student in her lab (the student whom I had to hand over my work to), saying that they are publishing a paper, and have decided I am the fourth author. I read the paper and found out that it uses my experimental setup and design, data collection, and one of the ideas I had presented (the idea wasn’t the main crux of my paper, but I believe it was novel).

I want to

  • Publish my original draft in ArXiv/BioArXiv, as first author.

  • Request my advisor to cite my work in their publication.

Given how she behaved with me, I know that despite what I am asking for sounds fair, she is likely to object.

I am asking the community: Can I go ahead and ArXiv it without her permission? I could add her as an author, but not take her permission. Also, if you have any other ideas on how to deal with this situation please let me know.

(For the record, this was at a top-10 school in the US in an engineering department).

  • 3
    How much is her contribution to your original draft you intend to send to arXiv?
    – Nobody
    Commented Jul 17, 2016 at 8:13
  • 2
    She was instrumental in getting the collaboration between me and the hospital to kick off and work, signing off on the consent forms to collect data at the hospital, and putting me in touch with the right people. No input to the actual analysis, programming, or work needed. Maybe some feedback on abstracts, some written material and posters.
    – Lux
    Commented Jul 17, 2016 at 9:02
  • To the final written draft that I have, probably nothing.
    – Lux
    Commented Jul 17, 2016 at 9:03
  • 8
    To ask @scaaahu's question differently: Is your old advisor a coauthor of your original draft? Would she have been if you had published earlier? If she is a coauthor, you must have her permission.
    – JeffE
    Commented Jul 17, 2016 at 9:26
  • 4
    @Lux: Can you clarify what you mean by "can I go ahead"? What exactly is at stake here? Obviously you can upload anything to arXiv, so what's the catch for you? Are you worried they'll take it down? Are you still doing research and worried about your research career? Are you wondering if you'll get sued for copyright infringement or similar? Are you wondering if your coworkers will suddenly hate you if they hear about this?
    – user541686
    Commented Jul 17, 2016 at 20:36

3 Answers 3


I suggest you respond to the student and your former advisor roughly as follows:

  • You do not consent to their proposal to publish the paper, as prepared, with you listed as 4th author. You believe that the substance of your contribution entitles you to first authorship, either on this paper, or on another paper to be published with citation priority.

  • You understand that your decision to withhold consent blocks the publication of the current work.

  • You would welcome an amicable resolution to the impasse that meets the needs of all parties.

  • Your proposal is [** what you said above **].

  • You welcome any alternative proposals from them for how to divide the work, in ways that are fair, and consistent with previous understandings and contributions.

  • You propose that if you cannot between yourselves craft a mutually acceptable solution within a reasonable timeframe -- say, 30 days -- then the matter should be submitted to the University Ombudsperson with a request to help mediate the dispute. ** [Edited:] If asked: You are open to alternative proposals for referees, but you want to keep the Ombudperson involved as the core arbitrator. (The reason: Other mediators might be more knowledgable about the professional and intellectual details of the case, and thus might be genuinely helpful. But they might be your ex-advisors allies, and/or craven cowards who just want problems to go away.)

I would cc everybody concerned on your letter, including the office of the University Ombudsperson. This last cc gives the Ombudsperson a 'heads up', and also puts a time-stamp on your letter with a (we hope) neutral third party. It also serves as a 'cease and desist' demand temporarily blocking any attempt to submit the paper for publication without your consent.

I am sorry you find yourself in this difficult situation.

  • 2
    I believe this answer is good for the specified situation. Note also that it would be good for your work to appear in a journal paper, since you have done most of it. Also, for open access distribution, you should consider arxiv prior to publication, but arxiv is not a substitute.
    – Nikey Mike
    Commented Jul 17, 2016 at 20:02
  • 1
    @Lux I agree with everything Arthur Small says; I would also suggest cc'ing the Head of the Dept. (this issue involves not one but two faculty within your former department, and the Dept. Head should know about a situation that might be considered academic bullying), and also your Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethics Review Board (ERB). These are issues beyond that of your former advisor's research group, and need to come to light to responsible parties at the department and college/campus levels. I also am very sorry that this has happened to you, and hope the situation improves.
    – iwantmyphd
    Commented Jul 17, 2016 at 22:57
  • 2
    @iwantmyphd may be right - but my impulse is to wait, and confer with the Ombudsperson first. Perhaps there is a well-worn path to be trod here. The more third parties you bring in, the slower things will move, and the more confrontational you may appear. My impulse is to see if you are getting any positive resolution, before expanding the "circle of complaint". Commented Jul 17, 2016 at 23:21
  • I did contact the Ombuds office. They told me flat out that they only offer options and do not offer advice or mediation. In essence they were not helpful. I did contact my advisor, and told her very politely that since the work they are trying to publish builds up on my work, I would like them to review my arXiv draft, and cite my work in their publication. Obviously there has been no reply.
    – Lux
    Commented Jul 20, 2016 at 7:17
  • If I cannot find an amicable situation with them, I would have to 'cease and desist', as suggested by @Arthur Small.
    – Lux
    Commented Jul 20, 2016 at 7:26

A paper must not be published without the (explicit or implicit) consent of all coauthors. This holds true for preprint servers as the arXiv just as for journals, etc.

Given the state of your relationship, there is no basis for assuming implicit consent of your former supervisor. Thus, submitting the paper to the arXiv with your former supervisor as coauthor without asking her is not an option.

You might be able to make a case that she should not be considered a coauthor. My understanding of the norms in your field is that the default assumption is that supervisors are coauthors - so your case would need to be strong enough to overcome that assumption.

This will depend on what your goals are, but in most cases, I would suspect that being some middle author on the paper they want to publish now might be the better outcome for you than having the original paper as single author on the arXiv, and a nasty publication ethics dispute.

  • 7
    Notwithstanding my suggested plan, @Arno's word's carry much wisdom. Whether to pursue a more aggressive defense of your claim, is a tough, tough call. One imponderable: allowing yourself to be bullied or humiliated, can itself be deeply draining. It can warp your entire outlook on your career, even on your life. For this reason, I would argue for a professional, calm, non-confrontational, non-emotional assertion of your claim, with attempts to create a quick, amicable resolution. But yes, it could get nasty, and thus expensive. Taking the authorship offered, is not obviously the wrong move. Commented Jul 17, 2016 at 23:18
  • 1
    Lux, I agree with Arthur Small that to take on this "fight" or not is a tough call. I myself is not a belligerent individual, but I personally feel that sometimes in life, even if a situation is terrifying, there are some things that are so important it compels you to stand up for your principles, against all odds, and against those who wrongs you or deliberately tries to take advantage of you. Not trying to make a direction comparison to your situation, but universal suffrage and gay rights would not exist if everyone just avoided confrontation.
    – LCW
    Commented Jul 18, 2016 at 9:03
  • Although experiences can shape our world view, I wouldn't call it "warp". Life is a journey and some of my negative personal experiences, in my opinion, have made me stronger and more mature.
    – LCW
    Commented Jul 18, 2016 at 9:03

The advise you're getting from other answerers is fine -- though I have a few points to offer. In this analysis, I'm entirely leaving the circumstances of your separation from the school out of the scenario, as there are quite a few sides to stories like this, and chances are your department and faculty don't have the same view of the situation as you do. I'll leave my analysis to circumstances as they exist now.

I suggest approaching the head of your departmental graduate program for a discussion before raising this to a higher level, and then possibly to the chair.

I also point out that the "fast forward a couple of years" part now puts part of the burden on you. You left a potentially volatile situation simmer for quite some time (innocently), and what would have been fairly easy to deal with a few years ago is now somewhat difficult. If you dig in your heels, and your past adviser does the same, I point out you're standing in the way of another student's publication, and you have to decide if you really want to do this. Try to remember that this student has been working for years in good faith.

In light of this, you might think about other possible resolutions that you might find acceptable. I think your request to publish your original manuscript as a draft, and have that cited in the new paper, is quite reasonable, but it does place some work on your old adviser that she might find objectionable, thus she might not be interested. You might think about how you would respond, for example, if you received an offer of second authorship for the current paper.

I encourage you to think about this situation in terms of how important this publication is to your career path as it stands right now. If it isn't all that important, you might just want to say "make me a second author" and let it go, but if its key, digging in your heels might be the right thing to do. Don't let it turn into a revenge thing, though.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .