Navigating Authorship: Considerations for First-Time Researchers

  • Thread starter Thread starter sleventh
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
An undergraduate physics student is working with a professor on two papers and has been offered the position of first author. The student is unsure about the social dynamics of authorship in academia and is considering whether to decline the offer or accept it with gratitude. Responses suggest that accepting the role of first author is a positive opportunity, as it often involves taking on significant work. It's recommended to express gratitude, but not to overthink the formality of the situation. The consensus is to focus on producing quality work and let the authorship details unfold naturally.
sleventh
Messages
61
Reaction score
0
Hello all,

I am an undergraduate studying physics and have recently began working with a professor on two papers we hope to publish. He has said he would "be happy to make [me] first author on both". I am very new to the social dynamics of how student/professor/professional academia should work. When I read this my eyes goggled, I feel like this is an incredible offer for him to make. The purpose of this post is to ask:

Should I "thankfully decline", i.e. am I expected to appreciate the offer but say it would be best for him to be first author.
If I say I would very much enjoy to be denoted first author how do I express gratitude; a simple thank you or more appreciative such as"thank you for the honor."
Lastly, is this not actually that large of a deal, but rather a simple formality I don't yet know.

Thank you for any input you are able to give
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Don't make a big deal out of it. Your advisor/professor gets to decide who is first, and who gets included in the paper. Just be grateful, and produce good work. Let everything else take care of itself.

Zz.
 
It might be one of those double-edged swords. It likely means that you'll get to do the majority of the work.
 
I sent him an email giving thanks, implying I am happy and grateful to be first author. Luckily I would enjoy doing most of the work :)
 
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...
Back
Top