Hey everyone. I’m looking for some advice. I’m coming to the end of the first year of a full time PhD course and have made the decision to transfer my studies to another UK institution. This is due to poor support from my supervisors who also do not have research interest/experience in the topic of my study. However, I’m now having to discuss the issue of intellectual property related to my project. I initially approached the institution with a research proposal, which has been developed with the support of my supervisors into the study as it stands today. It is the input in the creation of the study protocol that has prompted the lead supervisor to contact me regarding authorship/acknowledgment of any papers that may arise from the study going forward. At this stage I have suggested a way forward - acknowledgment but no authorship on all any papers - but this has not been well received. I am struggling to get a straight answer from them in terms of what they actually want. Any advice/guidance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks very much.

Unless you are commercializing the research I think this an authorship problem. Acknowledgement on all future papers sounds quite significant. I know authorship/acknowledgements vary depending on field but a never ending commitment is a lot, especially if you are going to compete with them. The project might be your idea but if you are not contributing anything after that.

Generally I think that you should get authorship if you contributed to the specific paper (either data collection or writing) and acknowledgement if you supported the authors for that specific paper. I would suggest authorship on any paper that uses your protocols or the first paper from the study (sort of as an acknowledgement). Authorship is a lot better than an acknowledgement and 1-2 papers sounds reasonable.