I am a PhD student currently writing up my thesis which was performing data analysis as part of a consortium project.
For a number of reasons the project has stalled due to poor planning, lack of expertise, personality clashes etc. This means that the paper describing the dataset has not yet been published, and in it's current state I can't see how it ever will be. My research is based upon the analysis of this dataset. There were 4 people working on the analysis for the project, and whilst we were all involved in the design, people took ownership of particular parts, and the end product is a bit of a disjointed mess - a classic case of “too many cooks spoil the broth”.
In my thesis, I have to include two pieces of analysis that were “led” by some of the other consortium members as they lay the foundations, and it would not be a coherent story without these sections. In the preliminary unpublished paper, these two pieces constitute two figures and are brief, incomplete, and in my opinion not methodologically robust. In my thesis, I have performed my own much more substantial versions of these analysis, and with what I consider a better approach which better fits my own work and story.
My analysis represents my own view of the data which has been expanded greatly however, it still addresses the same question and several of the same general conclusions are found. My questions regards how to properly navigate the authorship of these pieces and place the appropriate amount of credit with the people who did these preliminary analysis. I do not want to sign over credit for work where it is not due. Does anyone have any experience with this type of issue regarding authorship of works on consortium projects, particularly within PhD projects, or any general advice?