14 replies to this topic

[rajcell]

I know usually the boss of the lab is the corresponding author. But should it be determined by how much contribution who has made? For example, you are a senior member of a lab, you have discoved something out of your own idea. Certainly you will be the first author of any publications generated from your work. Can you also be the corresponding author because your boss has no direct contribution to your work except that he contributed his grant money?

thank you in advance for sharing your thoughts.

[matiefert]

The corresponding author should be the person who is willing and able to handle all correspondence with the journal editor, including responding to reviewers' comments and proofreading the final version, and all correspondence with readers of the published article.

So, the c. a. can be the head guy on the paper or it can be the person who actually did the work. But it should be someone who has not already left to lab to go on to do postdoc work someplace else.

Hope this helps!

cheers,

Marj

[wuxx0153]

In our department, the PI (the first PI not co-PI) of grant that supports the paper is the corresponding author.

That is why the boss of a lab usually is the corresponding author.

We had a post-doc year ago, she got her own fellowship and published a paper, she list herself as corresponding author, and my boss did not say anything. Guess $$$$ talks  

[Doki]

and one who will be in the same address for quite sometime.

[mimic143]

Hi,thanks for posting. I'm having the same prob as well. Could somebody post further suggestions to this prob? Thanks!


Regards,
mimic143

[HomeBrew]

Where I am, whomever has the grant that paid for the reseach is usually the corresponding author.

[honeyisdd]

In our lab, also boss is the c.a. though she is not going to answer questions to reviewers or do the proof...
once we had a collaboration of a big boss and then the big boss require himself to be the c.a. don't know why this matters.... also want to know what's the benefit of being c.a.

[newborn]

As I know, money talks! But sometimes you defer it to your boss to make him happy and then you can get better recommendation letter from him for your promotion.

[Adrian K]

So How about having  2 corresponding author? The $$$ Boss and the worker who do all the work?

[newborn]

adrian kohsf, on 03 August 2010 - 08:06 AM, said:

So How about having  2 corresponding author? The $$$ Boss and the worker who do all the work?

The worker has no leverage here, two $$$ Bosses or one $$$ plus another essential collaborator.

[Adrian K]

But seriously, for my case, I think of the idea, i wrote the proposal for/on behalf of my boss, my boss use it to get funds, funds approved, I do the work, and finally write the manuscript. My boss comments on my research, corrects my english and grammar, and do the submission.

If I ask to be the first author and one of the two corresponding author (there are also some other authors as well), will it be too much?
How do you think?

[newborn]

adrian kohsf, on 04 August 2010 - 08:58 AM, said:

But seriously, for my case, I think of the idea, i wrote the proposal for/on behalf of my boss, my boss use it to get funds, funds approved, I do the work, and finally write the manuscript. My boss comments on my research, corrects my english and grammar, and do the submission.

If I ask to be the first author and one of the two corresponding author (there are also some other authors as well), will it be too much?
How do you think?

First author is equal to CA, so you dont have request the CA. Just give your boss some credit and he will appreciate your kindness. You get some benefit from his recommendation letter. In addition, one or few papers is not meaning to your carreer, thus you dont have to fight with your boss on the small thing.

One more thing is the Co-CAs are usually from different places not from the same lab. Some direct supervisor is just the second name of the paper because they have no money and just Associate Prof.

[Bomber]

being the ca gives you a higher value in that whole project - it is not a formal thing, which is why certain bosses insist of being
the ca even though they did not do the main job regarding the project, the experiments, the paper, the proofreading...etc... .
my current boss agrees to share the ca which in my opinion is a better habbit than insisting on the ca though the boss may not have been of constructive help.... .
things like: should not leave the institute, and should be the one holding the grant are secondary issues here

[Pseudopneumo]

The corresponding author should be the person who would liaise with potential collaborators from other the scientific community. PhD students or other people on a temporary contract therefore is unlikely to be a good choice....

[pito]

Pseudopneumo, on 10 July 2012 - 08:28 PM, said:

The corresponding author should be the person who would liaise with potential collaborators from other the scientific community. PhD students or other people on a temporary contract therefore is unlikely to be a good choice....

In my opinion it should be the one who knows most of it and did most of the research, so often this is a PhD student... but to solve the problem of temporary contracts (as this is a problem) they should NOT use their university email adresses but their personal adress (or an adress they keep using). So if they leave you can still contact them.
And why not just put more then just 1 email adress on it..
I still find it weird that (even in new, recent papers, in the digital era) there is just 1 contact adress and often this doesnt even work anymore because the owner moved to another lab.. or left science in general and isnt involved in research anymore.

For me its simple: corresponding means "being able to correspond" , so make this possible by adding more email adresses, use your personal one, etc...

and just on a sidenote:

Quote

The corresponding author should be the person who is willing and able to handle all correspondence with the journal editor, including responding to reviewers' comments and proofreading the final version, and all correspondence with readers of the published article.

I dont think that the one handeling correspondence with the journal/reviewers needs to be the same as the one corresponding with other researchers with direct questions on the protocol for example.

Often one of the authors is the boss of the lab and often he/she had almost nothing to do with the paper, but he/she could handle the correspondence with the journal, but for example not be listed by email on the paper, but just the adress of the lab.
So other people would not bother him/her with questions she/he cant answer, while on the other hand: his name/adress is still on the paper for other/different issues concerning "more" then just the paper (being the responsible lab for example)

Edited by pito, 11 July 2012 - 12:24 AM.