Whats the difference in workload/contribution between 1st author and co-first author?
Does it matter who comes first? (I think the first co-first author gets cited instead of co-1, co-2 et al 2013).
0
6 replies to this topic
#2
bob1
-
- Global Moderators
-
- 4,340 posts
Thelymitra pulchella
222
Excellent
Excellent
Posted 22 February 2013 - 12:42 AM
Technically co-authors are all the authors on the paper. Some papers specify if more than one author has put in an equal contribution.(e.g. author X*, author Y* author Z. *-these authors contributed equally to this work).
Usually the citation will be the first author only, but it depends on the citation style you use.
Usually the citation will be the first author only, but it depends on the citation style you use.
#3
science noob
-
- Active Members
-
- 222 posts
Veteran
12
Good
Good
Posted 22 February 2013 - 09:44 PM
bob1, on 22 February 2013 - 12:42 AM, said:
Technically co-authors are all the authors on the paper. Some papers specify if more than one author has put in an equal contribution.(e.g. author X*, author Y* author Z. *-these authors contributed equally to this work).
Usually the citation will be the first author only, but it depends on the citation style you use.
Usually the citation will be the first author only, but it depends on the citation style you use.
but in most citation styles, the equal contributors dont get cited at all (e.g. X et al 2013 instead of X, Y, Z et al 2013)
#4
Tabaluga
-
- Active Members
-
- 177 posts
Hakuna Matata
17
Good
Good
Posted 23 February 2013 - 10:35 AM
Just curious, is a first authorship then "worth more" than a shared first authorship ?
#5
pito
-
- Active Members
-
- 1,022 posts
Veteran
51
Excellent
Excellent
Posted 23 February 2013 - 11:17 AM
Tabaluga, on 23 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:
Just curious, is a first authorship then "worth more" than a shared first authorship ?
If papers are quoted, its always the first author that will get the quote... So even if they have a shared first authorship, in the end its the first one that gets his name in the quotes.
The first on are always the ones people remember ... (with the last one, but those are just remembered because they allready established their name)
If you don't know it, then ask it! Better to ask and look foolish to some then not ask and stay stupid.
#6
Tabaluga
-
- Active Members
-
- 177 posts
Hakuna Matata
17
Good
Good
Posted 23 February 2013 - 11:32 AM
OK. But in terms of what it's worth if you apply somewhere ? Will a shared first authorship be considered of equal value as a normal first authorship ? Probably not, I think...
#7
hobglobin
-
- Active Members
-
- 5,249 posts
Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional...
60
Excellent
Excellent
Posted 23 February 2013 - 11:35 AM
sure every paper and even short communication or abstract in proceedings is important for your CV, even if only second, third or 20th author...in my CV I always write my name in bold in the list with such stuff
One must presume that long and short arguments contribute to the same end. - Epicurus
...except casandra's that belong to the funniest, most interesting and imaginative (or over-imaginative?) ones, I suppose.
