Hi there,

Sorry if this has been addressed elsewhere. I am in the process of submitting a paper including much of my doctoral research. The paper includes compelling new findings and could be a fairly strong paper. My supervisor at the time contributed to the work analysing part of the data. Unfortunately, i was unable to not point out to him several times how much of his analysis was inaccurate, irreproducible, and in some instances, plain wrong. These arguments of course ended up in me coerced to accept his version. So my situation at the moment is that we are trying to publish the manuscript the way he wants, wth me giving up my research ethic for the sake of an hypothetical high-impact first author publication. I can't be bothered anymore to be hunted by thoughts of publishing something not entirely accurate but i begin to think that this can obstacle me in the future. Specifically, i would like to follow up some of our findings but not from the standpoint of this paper. Could i publish this now and then publish something later which takes back something and add something else from the first publication? This paper could also include some wrong concepts, and again, part of the results are not reproducible, how much this is likely to affect my career, considering that i am the first author, but not the last one? Thanks in advance for your inputs.

Cheers