Researchers, or anyone else who has contributed to a paper in a meaningful way, who fall short of the requirements for authorship should still be recognised for their work if possible.
Although mentoring students to be first authors can be challenging, the rewards can also be immense—for both the students and the faculty mentors who are up to the challenge. doi: 10.20343/teachlearninqu.5.1.9 Cross Ref Full Text | Google Scholar Mc Kelvie, S., and Standing, L.
A literature search revealed not a single article on the topic of undergraduates publishing as first author.
In this paper, I specifically focus on how to guide undergraduates through the process of first authorship.
After describing potential barriers, I discuss issues of authorship contribution before outlining several successful strategies I've developed during my 24 years of collaborating with undergraduates. Teaching psychology research methodology across the curriculum to promote undergraduate publication: an eight-course structure and two helpful practices.
Finally, recent trends in psychological science, such as the difficulty of publishing single-study papers in some subfields and the “open science” movement calling for large sample sizes, pre-registration, and replication (see Chambers, 2017; Nelson et al., 2018) can seem like roadblocks to publishing with undergraduates. “Living in parallel universes: the great faculty divide between product-oriented and process-oriented scholarship,” in Faculty Support and Undergraduate Research: Innovations in Faculty Role Definition, Workload, and Reward, eds N.
Authorship Order Research Papers
Fortunately, faculty from diverse subfields have come up with creative solutions involving high-quality replications (e.g., Mc Kelvie and Standing, 2018; Wagge et al., 2019), preregistered projects (e.g., Strand and Brown, 2019), large-scale single-experiment class projects designed for publication (e.g., Lo Schiavo, 2018; Mickley Steinmetz and Reid, 2019), and multi-study projects involving student coauthors across years (e.g., Grysman and Lodi-Smith, 2019; Holmes and Roberts, 2019). doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02143 Pub Med Abstract | Cross Ref Full Text | Google Scholar Malachowski, M. He graduated from Duke University with a Ph D in Molecular Genetics and Microbiology and performed over eight years of research on pathogenic bacteria at Duke and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Dozens of excellent papers have recently been written that describe best practices for publishing journal articles with undergraduates (see “Engaging Undergraduates in Publishable Research: Best Practices,” Frontiers in Psychology); for the most part, these involve students as co-authors in general rather than as lead authors. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02295 Pub Med Abstract | Cross Ref Full Text | Google Scholar Mickley Steinmetz, K. For this reason, it’s best for the editor and authors involved to establish one “corresponding author”.Journals should require the corresponding author to verify the author list with all other authors and to serve as the primary contact for all other ethical assessments.Even if faculty members are made aware of this fact (as I hope to accomplish with this article), other barriers exist. Trials, tribulations, and triumphs: research and publishing from the undergraduate perspective. For example, many faculty work under a reward system in which publications (and first author publications in particular) determine tenure, promotion, pay, likelihood of securing grants, and job security (e.g., Costa and Gatz, 1992; Fine and Kurdek, 1993; Wilcox, 1998). The primary tradeoff is that the time it takes to mentor undergraduates through first authorship is generally much longer than the time it would take for the faculty member to be the lead author. Paul (Washington, DC: Council on Undergraduate Research), 7–18. The great experience provided to the student (see Matthews and Rosa, 2018), therefore, can come at the cost of decreased productivity (e.g., fewer publications overall, fewer first author publications, publications in lower-tier journals), which could be problematic for faculty at institutions that don't highly value faculty-undergraduate research. The first author is generally considered to be the primary contributor, and the last author may be seen as providing general oversight and direction (as the head of the lab, for example).Authors in the middle have contributed sufficiently to be listed on the paper, but perhaps in more limited ways than the primary authors.