1

What's the right format for in-prep publication on CV? I saw on another post that the format should be something like

[My name], & Author, ([year]). [Title of article].

But the problem is that the paper has a few dozen co-authors and my name will come somewhere closer to the end of the list. Also, there are two incredibly well-known scholars that are co-authors of the paper, so I prefer to somehow include their names! :-D But is there any way I can turn the format below into something acceptable?

[first author], ..., [my name], ..., [Prof. 1], ..., [Prof. 2] ..., ([year]). [Title of article].

  • The paper is in a sense "sequel" to a highly-cited previous paper published in Nature, so there is a chance this will be accepted by Nature too. Is there any way I could mention that? (It's not technically exactly "sequel" to that work, so using that word would be somewhat misleading and wrong.)
  • 2
    Perhaps better to include in research statement. The statement would allow you set the context you want. – Dawn Nov 16 '17 at 23:56
2

On formatting. You should list publications/drafts as they would appear in a bibliography. The reader will assume that you (co-)authored every document listed. (Personally, I would assume your honesty and I would never think to check that you truly are the author.) The reader is interested in the titles of your publications/drafts and the venues at which you published. I'd suggest using italics for titles, so that they stand out, and for published works, I'd suggest that the venue follows immediately after the title, since it can then be found easily, e.g., Cynthia S. Cooper, Willie E. Wright & Sun He (2017) Mathematics: Criticizing Nervous Essentialism and Xenon. In ALB'17: 17th ALpha Bravo conference, pp317-495, publisher.

On name-dropping. You can name-drop in the body of your CV. But, I'm unsure whether name-dropping should be encouraged. I think it would be better to say what you've done. You could perhaps achieve both, e.g., in collaboration with [name-drop], I extended their earlier results (Nature'XX) to A, B, and C.

  • What do you mean by "the main body"? All CVs I have seen are completely separated into sections listing specific things, and I would find any form of free-form prose odd to include. – Tobias Kildetoft Nov 17 '17 at 12:09
  • (I've replaced main body with body. Your publication list presumably appears at the end, outside the 1-2 page body.) I mean you can name-drop in the section where you describe that particular collaboration. E.g., Jan'16 -- present \t XYZ Corporation, Country \n ... In collaboration with [name-drop], I extended their earlier results (Nature'XX) to A, B, and C. – user2768 Nov 17 '17 at 13:23
1

There's not really an elegant way to include some names that are scattered throughout.

If you cite it as Bigdeal, J. et al. then it's implied that your in that list somewhere, but you can't really pick and choose just to highlight the fancy people scattered through the authorship list.

  • The first author is not one of those reputable professors though. Any way I could somehow write something that at least implies one of those professors is a co-author? like "a project of [prof. 1] lab" or something? – nra Nov 16 '17 at 23:11
  • @nra Not really. You could potentially reach into two or three authors before you hit et al. But I'd be skeptical about any other improvisation from standard citation practice. People are already a little skeptical of in prep in a CV as a concept. – Fomite Nov 16 '17 at 23:12
  • You could list that you've worked with reputable professors in the main body of your CV. – user2768 Nov 17 '17 at 10:05

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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