Hey,

Can someone offer some advice.I am 16 months into my PhD.My supervisor emailed me a paper he has submitted that contains sections describing my data findings. He added me as the third author but i told him that i was unhappy if my data findings were published my him first that it would steal the wind from my Phd and my future publications.He laughed and said HE was the one doing ME the favour....i still feel uncomfortable about it though I also feel foolish. Advice on this anyone??

alicemonty, that sounds so unfair to me. So sorry to hear that

I'm sure someone with better publishing experience will give you advice soon. I just wanted to express my sympathy. Good luck.

thanks I was so glad to find this forum cos people actually really understand what each other are going through...

I am not expert either but I have to agree, that does sound out of order to me. I do think you should have been asked to contribute to a paper based on your findings, it sounds very odd. Is there anyone at your Uni you could ask about this? Other PhD students or another supervisor?

this happens alot at my institution. I had a meeting with supervisor a couple weeks ago about an idea. I told her i needed funding for it and asked if there was a way we could get it etc. She said it was a bad idea. Next thing i know - teh thing that i suggested is being run by a commitee she is on. What can you do???
Its outrageous. But we are powerless.

it is definitely impolite to not ask you beforehand. i always get asked for comments whenever my super gives a talk or anything based on my work. however, his remark about "doing you a favour" maybe correct, it depends on the particular circumstances. he may have got wind of someone else doing similar work and about to publish soon. even so, they should have consulted you and explained the circumstances.

It seems a shame that there is nothing you can do about it - obviously seek advice from someone experienced in your dept, but i also wonder if you could contact the publication and explain your reservations? I'm sure theres a hundred reasons why this is a bad idea, but sometimes i wonder whether we really are powerless? After all, this guy has basically plagiarised you.

its not plagerised if name is on it.
I think that you should ask if you can present the paper if it gets published - that way you can get soemthign out of it. Then simply say - that they were your findings and you were not informed - but now that you know you want to learn more abuot the process of publishing and networking etc.

Supervisors vary greatly and I have known at least one student whose supervisor insisted his name went first even though he mainly glanced over finalised papers, but obviously publishing without consultation is a bit rich.

Some things to consider:
Validation by publication: If you've had data published it helps towards your PhD as saying your work has been verified by peers in the research community. Maybe you should be pushing your supervisor to be able to write a section on his next paper and in so get more experience writing and a longer list of publications.
Up by the bootstraps: My original supervisor had the idea that having known names on a paper increases its likelihood of publication, until you get your own known. You are able to then learn from the publication writing process. In my first year I wrote several papers onm populist subjects, that were tenuously linked to my PhD but did at least give me a grounding on paper writing if not anything to my PhD

But aren't peer-reviwed articles done so anonymously - i.e. when sending in papers, you're not supposed to include your name on the article itself - so how can 'known names' be more likely to be published?

I've observed a similar situation as well in my institution. I was having a meeting with my supervisor and read a publication in which the results were from phd student's research. He was put as the 3rd author.
Having said this, though it sounds unfair, i won't complain if that happened to me. If i have completed my phd and that happened, it might be a different story, but that's just my view.

Re the original post: I'm sorry to say this but I'm completely on the side of your supervisor, alicemonty.

First of all, having data does not automatically lead to a publication, your supervisor actually transformed your data into something publishable.

Second, your contribution to the whole publication is probably reflected in your position as the second or third author.

Third, your supervisor was fair enough to include you at all (there are some other cases out there).

And last, you now have a publication 16 months into your PhD, which will facilitate your PhD viva, as other's have already mentioned.

Stop complaining and be happy. but next time just try to publish on your own and don't give your data to your supervisor.

Good one otto but don't let him/her find out

I do not agree at all with Otta. I think your supervisour has no right stealing your data. if I were you I will officially complain about it.

i think it is because of your supervisor you are there doing this piece of research. however,anb when it comes to papers, good practices suggests each author to explain how he/she contributed in the particular paper. this could be a good start to justify your contribution and your original work.....hope it helps