Ok... my story. I'm a 3rd year PhD student in the process of writing up.

I recently submitted a paper to a journal which was rejected on the grounds it didn't fit with that particular journal. After this, my supervisor was approached by a different journal and invited to submit an article for a special edition. My supervisor asked to use my paper, with co-authorship and I agreed because the journal issue would be a special edition, and I want to get my work seen. I did all the research on my own, and wrote the paper alone, and my supervisor edited the paper, so I was not bothered about the co-authorship.

However, my supervisor is insisting on being first author, and when I questioned this, he stated the editor of the journal had asked him to submit and so this required him to be first author. After having the atricle accepted, I again questioned authorship, because I assume that as the paper has been accepted, the order of the authors should not matter to the journal editors. It should be the content that matters. I was again told that the editors require my supervisor to be first author and will not accept the article if he is not first author.

I feel uncomfortable with this, based on the fact that it is my research, and I did all the work preparing the original paper (lit reviews, methods, findings, discussion, etc). Is this a common thing? I didn't think the order of authors for a paper would be an issue for editors.

I don't know what to do. I can either accept that I won't be first author, and allow the paper to go through, or I can pull the paper and try get it published elsewhere, but fear upsetting my supervisor if I decide on this.

We generally have a really good relationship, and I don't want this to change.

At this stage, I think it comes down entirely to whether or not you want to prevent an injustice and upset your supervisor. From what you've described, you should most certainly be named as the principle author. Frankly, unless your supervisor has performed substantial rewrites in the process of editing, I question whether they should be listed as a co-author at all.

It's entirely possible that the editor of the journal will only take the article if your supervisor is listed as first author due to friendship rather than the quality of the piece - it shouldn't work like this, but sadly it does. You could always try contacting the editor directly and clarifying their policy on this.

If you're adamant that you don't want the credit for your article usurped, I would withdraw it and submit it elsewhere.

Hi Jimkin65,

I think Paralax is completely right. There seem to be two issues here:

1. You set it up, did the work, therefore you should be the first author.

2. There is a link between editor and your supervisor. Your supervisor may find it hard to admit that it is not really his work etc. etc. Whatever the reason for insisting to be the first auther, it probably will be hard to change this.

I agree. Have you spoken to the editor direct to clarify the position? I cant understand why it should matter to the journal editor what order the names are in...if its good enough to be published there, then it will be published elsewhere - i agree with the other two posters - sometimes integrity is more important, and your supervisor shouldnt be allowed to pull rank and bully his way into first authorship when he hasnt put in the work to merit it. And this way, he wont try it on again with others after you.

Thanks for all your advice and support guys. I set up a meeting with my supervisor today and explained my stance on the matter. He will be checking with the editor about reversing the names and if that doesn't happen the paper will be pulled and re-submitted elsewhere. I feel so much better about the situation now!

You guys are ace!