Hi people,

In 2013 I finished my MSc degree with a thesis - the results of which were publishable. The initial idea was that I would write a paper based on my thesis. I would be listed as the first author while my supervisors would be listed as the 2nd and 3rd authors. Subsequent to my defence I got a PhD position at another university and time consumption with my PhD project made it difficult for me to prioritize my work with the paper based on my thesis

One of my former supervisors called me and offered that my other former supervisor would take over the work associated with writing and trying to get the paper published. This person would then become the first author, while I would be the 2nd author. I accepted this because I know how much work is involved with converting a MSc thesis to a publishable paper.

We submitted and received the manuscript back with major revisions. Some more significant work was needed and I didn't have the time to work on the manuscript. Today, I saw that I was no longer the 2nd author but became the 5th author on the 2nd submission of the manuscript. I didn't hear anything from my former supervisor, who is the corresponding author and I was a bit surprized and dissapointed.

I should note that since the corresponding author took over the process of converting my MSc thesis to a manuscript, I have basically not been involved in the process - I just received updates about the progress on occassion.

Since I have very little experience with manuscript submission, I don't know whether this is standard practice. I understand that more work was needed in the preparation of the 2nd manuscipt submission, but at the same time, it was agreed upon that I would be the 2nd author.

What do you guys think?

I think it's because you haven't been very proactive with writing the paper and then making the revisions that they asked, so I understand why they have made the decision to move you from 2nd author and I don't feel that you should query it. If you had written the paper, or made the revisions required, you would have been higher on the author list.

I think there is a lesson here - you have to prioritise publications otherwise someone else will. I know how difficult it is to find time, but you have to find it.

I finished my PhD in August and started a postdoc straight away. When I left, I had 4 papers still to write from my thesis/other collaborations (I already have 1 published). In two months I have written 2 of them and I'm planning on writing drafts of the next 2 by the end of the year. I've done this by working 2 hours every evening on them and 1 day on the weekend. It's not easy or desirable, but I know I have to do it if I want a career in science. I will be first author on 3/4 of these papers - if I didn't write them and another student added to work and wrote the paper, or if my supervisor wrote the paper, I wouldn't expect to be first author.

It's understandable and perfectly fair that the contribution of others has been reflected in authorship. There is a lot of work in preparing a manuscript for publication.

Hi Leebio,

I answered a similar question concerning authorship here: http://www.postgraduateforum.com/thread-40224/

In regards to author order, my understanding is that if you haven't contributed much in the way of the new analysis and revisions, you would be lower in the authorship list, regardless as to whether you wrote the original draft. I think the reasoning is because new drafts, especially those with substantial revision, would have or present new analysis, which is considered the most important part.

I agree with DocInsanity, the preparation of revisions is often more work that the manuscript itself, and thus those who have worked on these preparations would be reflected in the author order. I've had something (the opposite) happen here at my new role, where I've taken over the writing of a paper and a report, building on the work that an RA has already done. The RA will be a coauthor, but further down the list, while originally they were listed as first. The first draft is okay, but I'm having to do some substantial revision, re-conceptualisation etc to get it up to scratch for submission, which is a heap of work.

Thank you for your insightful comments§

I didn't know about the conventions associated with publishing papers, so I am very happy you were able to answer my questions - Thank you again !