Corresponding author added other names as co-authors to the manuscript

Комментарии

• u/SweetAlyssumm·10·1 авг. 2026 г., 14:14

  That is a huge bummer. You have two unpleasant choices. Suck it up and get on with life (my recommendation) or talk to the PI and go through the drama of trying to get the two names removed. I guess there is also the nuclear option of contacting the editor and saying those two contributed nothing but hopefully you are not considering that. Next time be the corresponding author. Try to focus on research where you have control. I know that's not always possible but it's worth aiming for first author/corresponding author as often as possible.

  • u/Ok-Opposite-4745·2·1 авг. 2026 г., 15:23

    Yes i think i will just suck it up and make this a lesson for the future..

    • u/pconrad0·1·1 авг. 2026 г., 18:16

  • u/ThousandsHardships·1·1 авг. 2026 г., 17:37

    There's a third choice: talk to the PI without sounding like you're blaming them, and without demanding to remove the names. This way you call attention to the practice and make them think twice before doing the same thing on future publications, without rupturing the relationship.

• u/peasant-san·3·1 авг. 2026 г., 14:36

  This happens a lot at R1 institutions and I’m at sure at others also. You can talk w your PI about it, he / she may claim they helped conceive of the research design / whatnot even if they didn’t write anything

  • u/Ok-Opposite-4745·1·1 авг. 2026 г., 15:24

    It was a literature review-type of paper. So i do not think they helped with the research design 😔

    • u/peasant-san·2·1 авг. 2026 г., 15:28

    • u/eternallyinschool·1·1 авг. 2026 г., 15:43

• u/ExpensiveCandidate37·-4·1 авг. 2026 г., 14:57

  I mean, its ok for you to be annoyed, and I agree. But theres nothing you can do. Its the PI who decides who goes on the paper.

  • u/Ok-Opposite-4745·1·1 авг. 2026 г., 15:24

    True. Just surprised as this is my first time being in this situation

  • u/Own_Club_2691·1·1 авг. 2026 г., 17:02

    Maybe the PI decides, but based on rules. Adding an author who contributed nothing is unethical behaviour, and adding an author without consent of the other authors is most likely illegal behaviour as well (think of copyright law). By the way, I am a PI and I do not usually decide who goes on a paper. Sure, I discuss with my PhD students who could contribute to a paper and I might help to settle a conflict if one arises, but I don't usually see the need to make an actual decision.

    • u/ExpensiveCandidate37·1·1 авг. 2026 г., 17:10·1 ответ

    • u/Mountain-Time-1010·1·1 авг. 2026 г., 18:49

• u/CarnivorousGoose·14·1 авг. 2026 г., 15:03

  Have you asked your PI why they were added? That seems like the rather obvious first step here.

  • u/Ok-Opposite-4745·1·1 авг. 2026 г., 15:25

    I have not, since PI is on leave currently

• u/KrispyAvocado·4·1 авг. 2026 г., 15:25

  That happened to me a while back as well and was very annoying. Even more annoying because author order is based on contribution in my field and the PI added two people who objectively contributed much less than I had (i had never even heard of them before, and I’d been involved in the study from day one) before me in the list just before publication. When I questioned who they were and their contribution, I was told they helped out a few days and one was applying to grad school and needed some cred. Other than asking, I didn’t have a lot of recourse, so I just moved on. I’m still a little salty years later.

  • u/Ok-Opposite-4745·2·1 авг. 2026 г., 15:26

    Ouch sorry to hear that! Are you still working with the same PI? This makes me question whether i want to continue working in this lab or not

    • u/KrispyAvocado·3·1 авг. 2026 г., 15:41

• u/Mountain-Time-1010·8·1 авг. 2026 г., 15:35

  Regardless of whether or not those authors deserved authorship, this change should not have been done without a discussion with all authors.

• u/knit_run_bike_swim·1·1 авг. 2026 г., 17:27

  I learned to have authorship discussions before starting. It sucks that that has to happen, but it’s a big deal. Thankfully, most the journals in my field require authorship declaration. I’d be curious as to what your PI wrote for that. Academia can be hard. I have watched things be given away rather than internally contained because if the PI can expand their network beyond the lab, they might choose to do that because they already have internal connection. Better said, a PI might choose to hand a project to a surgeon at another hospital rather than give it to their postdoc or lab staff (who have performed all the work). This establishes future connections and investments rather than maintaining the ones that are already guaranteed. There could be many reasons why that path was chosen. We are often not privy to that information.

• u/ThousandsHardships·1·1 авг. 2026 г., 18:01

  I've been on the other side of this as the person whose name was added. In my case, the first author was a family member of mine and was functionally co-PI of the lab but without the title. The PI let them get away with a lot of stuff because they were leading the research direction and securing all the funding for the lab, all without the name or pay of a PI. I was a fresh college grad, so when people told me it was okay and that it would help me for grad school applications, I didn't question it. It did help me get into grad school, but it didn't help me succeed. I've since changed fields and I don't include those publications on my CV at all. For what it's worth, I don't think the co-authors minded my inclusion because they see it as giving a bright individual a boost who could use it. This family member of mine has also on a couple of occasions yielded first authorship to a postdoc that they thought had potential, and that postdoc is now the PI of that same lab and is doing very well.