Is it legal for a professor to add your name to a paper without consent?

[Cyrus]

Let's say a professor you're working under puts your name as an author on a paper without your knowledge or concent. You're then told its past the deadline to remove your name from the paper and the paper gets submitted with your name on it anyways. (Not having contributed anything to it or have been aware). Is there grounds here to sue said professor for forgery or misuse of your name without concent?

 

[Cincinnatus]

He probably thinks he's doing you a favor... Why don't you want your name on this paper?

 

[berkeman]

He probably thinks he's doing you a favor... Why don't you want your name on this paper?

That was my initial thought and question as well. On a patent application, it would be illegal to put your name on it without you having been a significant contributor. Don't think anything similar applies to publishing papers.

Are there errors in the paper that you think should be corrected before publication? Has it already made it past peer review?

 

[Cyrus]

Because I didn't contribute to it. Not one thing. None. And no one signs my name to papers\obligations without my consent.

I was only made aware of my name being on it after it was too late to take it off as a list of authors.

 

[turbo]

Your consent to work for the professor may have committed you to an explicit or implied right for him to credit you for work on his projects. Please check that before you dump on him. Many students appreciate being credited, even if their work was ancillary to the research project, and he might have thought this was good for you.

"No good deed goes unpunished."

 

[Cyrus]

Your consent to work for the professor may have committed you to an explicit or implied right for him to credit you for work on his projects. Please check that before you dump on him. Many students appreciate being credited, even if their work was ancillary to the research project, and he might have thought this was good for you.

"No good deed goes unpunished."

I never signed any contract with him agreeing to this. The problem is that it's a total lack of consideration to sign someones name to an obligation without telling them. It's just not right.

 

[Pythagorean]

Is it possible that you inspired him through:

a) casual academic discussion
b) submitting homework to him that asked open-ended discussion questions.
c) any research that you have contributed to that he could adapt to his work.

 

[Cyrus]

Is it possible that you inspired him through:

a) casual academic discussion
b) submitting homework to him that asked open-ended discussion questions.
c) any research that you have contributed to that he could adapt to his work.

No, he and I don't like each other and no longer work together.

 

[Defennder]

No, he and I don't like each other and no longer work together.

Then it's certainly quite puzzling that he chose to include you as a co-author!

 

[Cyrus]

If I find out my name makes its way onto any papers I'm going to write a letter to that journal and tell them to retract my name from it.

 

[Sheneron]

Tell him he can put my name on it if he'd like

 

[Cyrus]

If you're not here to answer my question then leave.

 

[DaveC426913]

If I find out my name makes its way onto any papers I'm going to write a letter to that journal and tell them to retract my name from it.

Ask him why first.

 

[Cincinnatus]

So let's pretend Cyrus is completely self-serving here (we have no reason to think he is)


He could:

a). Leave his name on the paper and have one more publication. Depending on where he is in his career this could be quite a big deal for him.

b). Retract his name by contacting the journal, making a big deal about it, etc. If people in the field know him at all and he can get something with his reasons for retracting his name published (assuming there are some scientific reasons as well) AND assuming he has no loyalty to this professor... then it might help him more to publish a retraction...

c). sue the professor on dubious legal grounds... I don't think this would accomplish anything...

 

[Cyrus]

To be clear, I'm not getting a PhD, and I'm not trying to become a professor. I'm not here to publish as many papers as I can. The only thing I did was to collect data for a friend of mine because he asked me for my help. I agreed to collect the data for him. I find out more than half way into the deal that I'm supposed to be a co author and its too late.

I do not deserve to have my name on a paper for collecting data. What a joke. If I'm putting my name on any papers its going to be because I helped with some form of analysis.

My question still stands though: What right does an advisor have to sign your name to obligations you were not made aware of.

 

[Math Is Hard]

Did you talk to the professor about this and explain that you didn't think your contributions (helping your friend collect data) merited being listed as an author? What did he say?

 

[Vanadium 50]

To specifically answer the question, of course you can sue. You can always sue.

Whether you will win is another matter. As is what sort of judgment you will receive, and as is what you will collect.

There are two questions a court will probably ask you - what damages did you suffer, and what remedy is appropriate. You might think about the answers to those questions before launching a drawn-out and expensive legal action.

 

[Cyrus]

I'm not going to sue :)

But I am seriously PISSED OFF about the matter. So I wanted to know if it's illegal or not to use someones name without their permission.

Anyways: Damages: Using my name without my permission
Remedy: Take name off paper.

 

[maze]

Dude you're just angry at the guy and trying to find anything you can to get a dig at him.

 

[physics girl phd]

The only thing I did was to collect data for a friend of mine because he asked me for my help. I agreed to collect the data for him...

And presumably you did collect that data... right?

Quite honestly, often most of what students at the undergraduate contribute to papers is just such a thing... simply the collection of data (even data slightly peripheral to the study... such as a case where I had an undergraduate measure surface roughness of some samples with AFM... and used his results to select which samples to study), a program to help collect or analyze data, or the manufacture of suitable samples to study. If some of the data collected from your small contribution was used in the process of publication, then leave it at that. To some extent you deserve to be listed as a coauthor. (Presumably there's a list of at least three or four authors, and you aren't the top/first author, right? -- In that scenario, people who look at your CV will assume your contribution is slight, and you won't be asked the full details of the work, although it's be good to remember the techniques used to collect the data.)

It is surprising perhaps, that you weren't contacted... maybe your friend was supposed to pass on the info and neglected. Or maybe the professor feels bad about your personal relationship, and wanted to offer this as a sign of healing/respect... even perhaps a sign that he would be willing to be a reference for you (it would be hard to give a bad reference once you're a co-author on a paper. right?).

 

[Astronuc]

Damages: Using my name without my permission

You should write to the journal to have your name removed.

I don't believe using your name without permission/consent meets the definition of damage. If somehow your reputation or character was damaged, then you might have a case.

Perhaps the professor was doing this as a courtesy since you contributed to the data collection.

 

[TVP45]

Cyrus,

Most academic and journal ethical guidelines either prohibit or discourage this practice. Whether you can sue to have your name removed would likely depend on the nature of your relationship with the professor, i.e, were you an employee or a contractor or merely a volunteer, and state law where you live.

 

[Astronuc]

A lawsuit would take time and cost money. It's best to just write the journal and have one's name removed.

I would also expect the university has an internal body to deal with such matters, e.g. their legal staff or counsel.

But one should start with the professor in question, then go to the department head, then perhaps the science or engineer school, then to the university - as necessary.

 

[f95toli]

Just to add to what Physics Girls Phd has already written. What the professor in question did is not that uncommon, it usually happens because someone decides to e.g. go to a conference at the last minute and the deadline for the paper is rapidly approaching.
The same thing has happened to me a couple of times but I didn't mind; it is one more publication for my CV and I knew the author so I could be sure that the paper would be of reasonably good quality (and it was after all just conference papers).
However, if someone wrote a "proper" paper without telling me I would be annoyed; mainly because there is no deadline meaning there is always time to show the manuscript to everyone involved.

Also, you DID collect data that -as far as I understand- was subsequently used in the paper; meaning you SHOULD be listed as a co-author (or at least be listed in the acknowledgments). Although I agree that you should at least have been told.
But again, this is not uncommon so I suspect the professor won't think he/she did anything wrong.

 

[Choppy]

This seems like an odd case. I would expect it's far more common for the reverse situation to anger people: a student does data collection, but the lead author does not feel he or she contributed significantly to the work and so leaves the student's name off of the author list.

Not knowing exactly what work was done in the case, it's difficult to comment. It's apparent that Cyrus does not feel he or she contributed to the work and does not want to receive undue credit - fair enough.

The underlying issue though, is does the professor have the legal right to use Cyrus's name. I'm no lawyer, but, it's important to note that there seems to have been either an employer/employee relationship or at least teacher/student relationship. When you agree to work for an employer, both you and the employer are entitled to certain rights and have certain obligations. The employer may in fact have the right to publish the names of his employees in relation to work performed. This is something that only a lawyer can answer (or someone willing to read through the state-specific law books).

I would agree that the best solution here seems to be a letter to the journal indicating that Cyrus does not wish to be included as an author. These kinds of fixes are simple enough as long as the work has not yet gone to print.

 

[Mapes]

There's no point in a lawsuit unless you can prove damages (looking back at your comments... do you know what damages means?). Frankly, even if the paper were total junk, it can hardly affect your career unless you're the first author or the PI. People just don't care that much. I imagine nearly researcher has been third or fourth author on some paper they didn't think was that good. So your damages are likely minuscule even if the paper is poor.

And this probably wasn't even done as a provocation. The professor probably wanted to avoid enraging you over omitting your contribution, especially since you're not on good terms.

The angle you want to take, rather, is that it is unprofessional to not let you review a manuscript that you authored before it is submitted. This is something you can surely take up with this professor's department head. Consequences for the professor: possibly a reprimand or reminder of professional behavior. Consequences for you: your poor relationship with this person will be cemented.

You can also write the journal. It's unlikely you'll be able to unilaterally retract the paper, but they might issue a correction. It would be professional of you to state that you wish for your name to be removed due an error in assigning authorship, as opposed to any doubt about the paper's data, methodology, or conclusions.

 

[daveyinaz]

get over it...accept it as one more thing to add to your cv/resume...and then never speak of it again...

 

[Topher925]

I agree with dave. You did play some role in the creation of this paper which makes your name up for grabs. So either talk to the professor or accept it.

 

[Pythagorean]

Dude you're just angry at the guy and trying to find anything you can to get a dig at him.

Cyrus comes off as frustrated and angry in a good portion of his posts. I don't think it's directed at anyone person.

 

[L62]

Cyrus there is no law I know of prohibiting a professor from putting your name on a publication. It is more of an ethics issue than a legal one.

I would write to the journal editor and ask them to retract your name from the paper. I'm not sure what effect this will have. For example, entire published papers that have been retracted (due to it later being proven that the work was falsified) still exist in citation databases, and online versions of the publications still exist for downloading, it's just that they now have the word 'retracted' added beside them or stamped across them or something.

so if the journal editor does retract your name, it may not mean that your name is now erased from history as far as the paper's citation goes. it may be that there's now just a note accompanying the citation or the online version of the paper it saying that you retracted yourself even though your name may still be there. But then again it may not and maybe they will erase your name from history, I'm not sure what will happen so it's best to just talk to the journal editor.

If it is retribution toward the professor that you are after (since you talk about suing), I think the appropriate thing is to first talk to the professor and get an apology if that is what you want. If you don't get it then go to the department chair or the dean and take the issue up with them.

 

[Cyrus]

I'm not going to sue him, and I'm not going to retract the entire article because my friend worked very hard on it and we spent A LOT of time getting data.

Im screaming because I do not tolerate doing things behind my back. When my (former) advisor slapped my name on the paper w/o telling me that was an insult. I don't care how good his intentions were. I don't care if it wins paper of the year. DONT USE MY NAME LIKE THAT. This is a matter of principle.

 

[turbo]

Just act surprised at the Nobels, and say (with feigned sincerity) "You love me!", "You LOVE me!"

Geeze!

 

[L62]

I must have missed something then because in your first post you were asking about suing the professor...

Let's say a professor ... Is there grounds here to sue said professor for forgery or misuse of your name without concent?

and I wasn't talking about retracting the entire article, just your name from the author list.

so I thought you were looking to do something concrete to remedy the situation, whatever that is. But if you have no intention of retracting your name, then what outcome are you seeking?

 

[Andy Resnick]

Let's say a professor you're working under puts your name as an author on a paper without your knowledge or concent. You're then told its past the deadline to remove your name from the paper and the paper gets submitted with your name on it anyways. (Not having contributed anything to it or have been aware). Is there grounds here to sue said professor for forgery or misuse of your name without concent?

If what you say is accurate, then the professor commited a major ethical violation, period. I agree with the recommendation to directly contact the Journal Editor (email is fine), with a detailed explanation (not an emotional one) of the facts and request that your name be removed. Then put the matter out of mind and move on.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I am not so sure this is necessarily a major ethical violation, at least not without knowing more details. It's clear that Cyrus contributed and should be either an author or given an acknowledgment. If the professor tried to reach Cyrus and failed, and other students with similar contributions ended up on the authorship side of the line, it's not clear what else the professor could have done.

I'm not arguing that this is the case here - just that it's not necessarily so cut and dried.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Putting someone's name on a paper without both informing that person and asking permission is one of the most clear-cut types of ethical violations.

 

[ank_gl]

My question still stands though: What right does an advisor have to sign your name to obligations you were not made aware of.

your question does not have an answer in a nor or a yes. It entirely depends upon the situation. You need to know why he did what he did, it seems more likely that he was aware of your contribution in data collection & didn't want to piss you by not recognizing your efforts. Maybe he overestimated your efforts, maybe he recognized your efforts, can be anything, depends entirely on his judgment.

He is only being good to you. Dont be soo resolute in principles. He might be wrong on principles, but he may be right morally.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Andy, I am going to disagree - I don't think it's always clear cut.

Three examples that I have witnessed:

Case 1: A scientist contributes to the design of an experiment, the data collection, and a really clever way of filtering the data. He passes away before the technique is really applied to that data, but had he lived and done nothing else, would clearly be an author. Should he be an author?

Case 2: A scientist is on a large, mega-collaboration. She has met all of the authorship criteria. Papers are announced on a website open only to the collaboration, and the collaboration policy is that an author is automatically on a paper unless she objects. She doesn't check the website and a paper she disagrees with is published. Has the collaboration or the spokesperson lapsed ethically?

Case 3: (One similar to this one) A number of undergrduates assist on a project, all doing similar work. One graduates before the paper is written. Everyone (including them) agrees that the remaining undergraduates should be authors, but this person cannot be reached. (As it happens, they joined the military after graduation) Should that person's name in included or excluded?

I don't think it's always as clear as we would like.

 

[vanesch]

This is a funny discussion! Most people try to get onto papers. Clearly Cyrus contributed to the paper by doing some data collection. If the professor was in a hurry submitting the paper, and given the fact that apparently Cyrus and that professor don't have a good relationship, then if the professor had to choose between putting Cyrus on the paper or leaving him off, without the possibility of asking him, then the obvious choice would be to put him on the paper. If Cyrus would be happy, then in a way, Cyrus would "owe something" to him. If Cyrus would be angry (as he seems to be), this would then picture the professor as a correct person who cares about people who take data for him, even (or especially) when their human relationships are not very good, and picture Cyrus as a difficult character do deal with. On the other hand, if he would not put his name on it, and Cyrus would be angry, then that would put the professor in a more difficult position: he might be accused of having abused of Cyrus' work and because of his bad personal relationship, been unethical by not having Cyrus' name on the paper.

In doubt, the professor had every reason to put Cyrus on the paper, it was a win-win situation for him, and it would have been a more difficult situation not to put Cyrus' name there.

I would say that Cyrus would make some kind of fool of him by wanting his name to be retracted from the paper *unless he has serious scientific reasons* to do so. In THAT case his request could be very interesting (like, I don't want to be associated with this fraud or something). But if this is a sound paper, and Cyrus did make some data collection for it, he would just show up as a strange and annoying person wanting to make a spectacle of himself. And that might have been the real reason why that professor put his name there in the first place: to have Cyrus react exactly like this, and for him to make a fool of himself.

Get me right: Cyrus is not making a fool of himself, but he will appear to many to do so.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Andy, I am going to disagree - I don't think it's always clear cut.

Three examples that I have witnessed:

<snip>
I don't think it's always as clear as we would like.

The phrase that comes to mind here is "bad cases make bad law". Example (1) can be dealt with easily- not an author, goes in acknowledgment**. Example (2)- the scientist is at fault, since the policy was (presumably) known beforehand and agreed to as a condition of employment. Example (3): (ex) student goes in acknowledgments.

Don't take my word for it:

http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/02_2.cfm
http://www.apa.org/science/rcr/publication.html
http://www.nih.gov/catalyst/back/95.07/h.Ethics.html

Key to every single statement is a phrase similar to "as well as a willingness to assume responsibility for the study", and that is precisely what Cyrus does not have.

**Edit- another option is to dedicate the paper to the dead guy.

 

[Andy Resnick]

This is a funny discussion! Most people try to get onto papers. Clearly Cyrus contributed to the paper by doing some data collection. If the professor was in a hurry submitting the paper, and given the fact that apparently Cyrus and that professor don't have a good relationship, then if the professor had to choose between putting Cyrus on the paper or leaving him off, without the possibility of asking him, then the obvious choice would be to put him on the paper. <snip>

Absolutely not. The obvious choice would have been to put Cyrus' name in the acknowledgments section.

I have a forceful opinion on this subject because professional ethics is rarely formally taught, and it should be a part of graduate education although it is for many other professions- medicine, law, business (insert joke here), etc. The public respects scientific research *because* of the ethical guidelines- ethics is not there to make us feel good about ourselves, it is to ensure that I do not have to go back to first principles every single time I do an experiment.

 

[vanesch]

Key to every single statement is a phrase similar to "as well as a willingness to assume responsibility for the study", and that is precisely what Cyrus does not have.

This is exactly what makes it so difficult to have him his name withdrawn without somehow exposing him to a weird view. Is he an irresponsible person ? Did he make such a mess of it, that he is ashamed of what he did ? Does he just want to be a prima donna ? Does he think he has such a reputation that the professor is getting an extra honor by having Cyrus name on it (as it would be like having Witten's name on it or something) ? It is difficult to do so without getting a funny reputation. So how do you go about having your name removed of a correctly done study to which you contributed and without having fundamental scientific reasons ?

 

[vanesch]

I have a forceful opinion on this subject because professional ethics is rarely formally taught, and it should be a part of graduate education although it is for many other professions- medicine, law, business (insert joke here), etc. The public respects scientific research *because* of the ethical guidelines- ethics is not there to make us feel good about ourselves, it is to ensure that I do not have to go back to first principles every single time I do an experiment.

The point is that scientific activity is a human activity like any other and that publications, and names on them, and citations are a major tool for career-making in the academic world. They are what money is in the business world. Individual actors in the field are expected to try to increase their visibility in the field by trying to be on as many publications as they can, and by having as many citations as they can. That's the expected social behavior within the scientific community. It gives a strange picture to be angry at someone who wanted to do you a favor as a function of the expected general aspirations in the group (in other words, by putting your name on a paper, which is normally what you are craving for). The strangeness comes about from the not fitting into the expected social behavior in that group.

It is as if you became angry at an airline company because it sent you some free tickets to thank you for being a faithful customer, with the excuse that you want to deserve your tickets by paying for them, and that you don't want any favors you didn't ask for.

 

[Andy Resnick]

To some degree it's not relevant *why* he would want his name removed, but I totally understand what you are saying. Cyrus needs to decide what his priorities are- the risk of looking unprofessional, or the benefit of having a clear conscience.

 

[Andy Resnick]

<snip>
Individual actors in the field are expected to try to increase their visibility in the field by trying to be on as many publications as they can, and by having as many citations as they can. That's the expected social behavior within the scientific community.

<snip> someone who wanted to do you a favor

<snip>

I highlighted and extracted those bits precisely because they demonstrate, better than I could, on *why* there are professional guidelines for authorship. In fact, according to Cyrus, he was *not* done a favor. And, whether or not (you think) certain behaviors are "expected" or not is no justification for anything- ethical and professional guidelines exist for a reason! Science is not subject to mob rule or majority opinion.

 

[L62]

there are reasons to not want your name to be on the author list even if you did contribute to the paper, and so you have the right to decide if you do want to be listed as an author or not.

For example, it does happen that sometimes collaborators on a project disagree with the conclusions of the work. The lead author has the final say in how the paper should be written, but if a collaborator seriously feels that the paper is not scientifically sound, they may not want their name to be associated with such - in their opinion - flawed work. Your professional reputation can be affected. Not all published papers are "good" and if my collaborators used some of my work but I wasn't at all impressed with what they were doing with my contribution, I would not want my name associated with a paper that I feel is not going to put me in a good light.

So, Cyrus' motives for wanting his name removed from the paper is beside the point. He could have many valid reasons for not wanting to be associated with the work. the question is whether there was an ethical violation committed, and what he can do about it, and is it going to help any to do something about it.

 

[stewartcs]

Let's say a professor you're working under puts your name as an author on a paper without your knowledge or concent. You're then told its past the deadline to remove your name from the paper and the paper gets submitted with your name on it anyways. (Not having contributed anything to it or have been aware). Is there grounds here to sue said professor for forgery or misuse of your name without concent?

The only way to really know is to consult an attorney.

However, it doesn't sound like forgery since he didn't use your name with intent to commit fraud or deceit.

FORGERY - The act of criminally making or altering a written instrument for the purpose of fraud or deceit; for example, signing another person's name to a check. To write payee's endorsement or signature on a check without the payee's permission or authority. The 'payee' of a check is the true owner or person to whom the check was payable.

However, if you suffered actual damages by his actions, then you may have case. However, if you suffered no actual damages then you will not get anything.

Again, it's best to consult an attorney if you are serious about pursuing this.

CS

 

[Sheneron]

Haha its like trying to sue someone for giving you 500 dollars. There are only negative damages.

 

[DaveC426913]

Haha its like trying to sue someone for giving you 500 dollars. There are only negative damages.

No.

It's like someone giving you credit for rescuing a little girl from a burning car when in fact it was the guy who left before the camera crew arrived.

An honest person does not take credit where no credit is due.

And realizing that someone has given you this unwarranted credit deliberately and knowingly is something that cannot be countenanced by an honest person.

 

[Mapes]

No, it's like someone pointing at you and saying, "That's my baby's father." I mean, the baby's beautiful and all, but...