<p>Im new to non-STEM research, so I just dont really know how it and grad admissions work for this field.
(forgive the length)
I started of as a Chemistry major, promptly switching to Biology, Environmental Science and finally to Environmental Studies. That last switch was, essentially really pointless. The classes at my university for both majors are VERY similar (almost identical in a lot of places), theres serious overlap in the earlier major requirements but theyre just offered through different departments (bio/geo and urban affairs, respectively). The only real difference is that I can finish sooner because the courses are offered more regularly through the urban affairs department and they have more/younger faculty while the bio/geo/evs department is losing a lot of folks to retirement.</p>
<p>Ive done two and a half years worth of research in biochem/pharmacology labs but this semester Im starting to do research with the urban affairs department that deals more with policy, planning, and economics. The professor publishes very regularly (his words) and has had three four papers published every year for the past few years. Hes assigned me a project and is very confident in at least one publication coming out of it.</p>
<p>I know publications are a big deal if you can get them as an undergrad for STEM work. Are publications as significant in work around urban development/economics? Id like to go to a Masters program relating to urban development/sustainability and thanks to being a half-hearted STEM major, my GPA isnt all that impressive at about a 3.2-3.3 (but I have 3-4 semesters remaining to bring that up). My sciences classes are whats weighing me down but my grades in classes relating to writing, comprehension, and urban studies and policy are significantly higher (lowest one is a B in Brit Lit II).</p>
<p>IMO, unless its a first author pub, it probably won’t be too helpful. Profs have told me that they’re aware some labs are more willing to put undergrad students names on pubs and some dont even if they contributed significantly.</p>
<p>I disagree significantly with the above comment. The majority of labs won’t risk their reputation by putting an undergrad’s name on a paper to which they have not significantly contributed, so I think most professors assume that if an undergrad’s name is on the paper they have contributed to the paper pretty significantly (as long as they are fourth or fifth author or higher; after a 4 or 5 authors, I think most people begin to wonder about the contribution of <em>any</em> authors, regardless of whether they are undergrads or tenured professors).</p>
<p>With that said, if you are an undergrad and you have a publication that’s a big push in your favor. It demonstrates that you already know how to do scientific research on some level and engage with the kind of work that scholars do. This is especially true in economics, since they’re a social science also based upon publication. Urban studies scholars also publish papers so I can imagine it would be a good thing for them too.</p>
<p>I agree with pryoknife, at least in the engineering field. I have spoken to several professors who have stated something along the lines of “Anyone can add anyone’s name on a paper. It’s simple. I’ve seen applicants where students who’ve had years of research experience with good LORs, but no publications. I’ve also seen students with several publications (none of which were 1st author), but with no LORs supporting those pubs. Are you telling me the latter student is better?” </p>
<p>I don’t understand how a lab can lose their reputation by putting an undergrad’s name on a paper. I’ve worked at well known labs in the past. This one kid got his name on a publication because he happened to drive the 1st author to the conference, but did not contribute at all on the research/writing the paper. </p>
<p>1st author publications are a completely different things. 2nd or any lower position of authorship are pretty mediocre. You should already have LORs supporting your experience.</p>
<p>^I would imagine that a lab allowing people to take credit for work they did not contribute to would make people question their ethics.</p>
<p>I always heard that the PI of the lab who came up with the research idea would be the one to be listed as first author and everyone else varying as based on the work they put in.</p>
<p>Sometimes it depends on the field. In mine, it’s generally the PI/advisor that’s last author. Person that did the bulk of the work is first author. Everyone in the middle is based upon the amount of work you put in. Also, I’d say considering second author as “pretty mediocre” is a bit of an overstatement. I’ve been second author on a decent number of papers so far, generally from when I’m mentoring a student on how to do work in our lab or I come up with a project, help them thinking through some of the problems, but don’t do the bulk of the work or writing.</p>