<p>But a nine-year-old could not contribute novel observations and interpretations in order to justify co-authorship. Sometimes hundreds of people work on a project, contributing a lot more than any nine-year-old could, but never get their names on the resulting papers. I have a master’s degree and worked on projects that resulted in dozens of papers, and my name isn’t on any of them.</p>
<p>My conclusion: When a nine-year-old’s name is on a scientific paper, it’s because some adult wants to impress someone with how smart their kid is. It’s meaningless.</p>
<p>From reading the Braintree Police Chief statement, it seems to me that the Braintree police department just opened themselves to a huge possibility of civil lawsuit by the victims family. No?</p>
<p>This thread will likely have legs because of the Braintree police fiasco after her brother’s killing and possibly the attempted bombing. </p>
<p>Heads are likely to roll in Massachusetts.</p>
<p>Is there any update on the injured at UAH?</p>
<p>Some commenters on the Chronicle of Higher Education site are actually trying to rationalize her shooting spree if not outright excuse it. Some are Ph.D.'s who have been denied tenure. scary!</p>
<p>poetgrl–I’m not going to give an opinion. However, here is a post I found on the Internet that you might read and consider. Keep in mind the diference in the police department and the individual(s) involved.</p>
<p>I work in science as well. As I’m sure you know, what level of work justifies co-authorship is highly subjective and often depends on the principal investigator, who obviously would be more likely to be generous if they were a family member. It also depends on the field and/or whether it is done in industry or academia (it’s a lot easier to get your name on a publication in a university, for various reasons.) This paper is pretty simple, though, with very basic techniques. Most of them could be picked up with a week of training. I suppose the slide preparation would be a bit harder, requiring a bit more manual dexterity. We don’t know how the work was divided up here, but often, people who do a “significant” amount of the lab work would get authorship. I could imagine scenarios in which it would be justified, but who knows what actually happened. It’s not that unusual for undergrads to get authorship and they usually only work full-time for one summer. </p>
<p>Most fields don’t require hundreds of people to work on a project. I’m curious to know what field you are in.</p>
<p>The child is 9 now and the paper has already been published. How old was the child when the research was being done? Do you honestly think the child contributed enough time and energy to have his/her name place on the paper?</p>
<p>Why are people assuming one of the authors was the youngest kid? Bishop had four children; three of them are listed as co-authors. I would assume, absent more information, that the youngest is not one of them.</p>
<p>Having said that, I think it is bogus to list the children as co-authors. I know a lot of academics, and a lot of their kids do research, but I don’t know any who do research in the labs of their own parents. Furthermore, the vast majority who do research do not have their names on publications, even if they do submit the work for competitions.</p>
<p>Wow–the journal thing is really bizarre! It looks like her kids are the first 3 authors of the paper. Usually the first author is either the senior scientist in the lab or – especially in training programs–the postdoc who carried out most of the work. The senior scientist takes last author position in that case. The first author also generally drafts the paper (often with extensive input of the more senior scientists. There may be younger kids (e.g. high schoolers or college students working after school or in a summer lab experience) who get to be authors on a scientific paper, but they are generally relegated to being stuck some where as a middle author. And a nine year old!!!</p>
<p>I haven’t heard of the journal cited --“International Journal of General Medicine”–but it’s probably pretty low-impact. It struck me that this article was pretty basic for a journal described as being focused primarily on clinical medicine:</p>
<p>“International Journal of General Medicine is an international,
peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that focuses on general and internal
medicine, pathogenesis, epidemiology, diagnosis, monitoring and treatment
protocols.The journal is characterized by the rapid reporting of reviews, original
research and clinical studies across all disease areas.
A key focus of the journal is the elucidation of disease processes and
management protocols resulting in improved outcomes for the patient. Patient
perspectives such as satisfaction, quality of life, health literacy and
communication and their role in developing new healthcare programs and
optimizing clinical outcomes are major areas of interest for the journal.”</p>
<p>Most reputable high-impact scientific journal today require statements from all of the authors certifying that they had significant input into the design/conduct of the study. Many also require each author to actually designate which parts of the research and/or drafting of the paper for which they were responsible.</p>
<p>Something seems very odd here… (in addition to all of the other add aspects of this tragic case).</p>
<p>Maybe not lawsuits per say but reputations: The DA at the time is now a congressman, Delahunt, who may decide not to run for reelection if this shows malfeasance on his part.</p>
<p>I wasn’t referring to my own experience, actually, although I have worked on projects involving dozens of people, not hundreds, in aerospace and large-scale power generation. In the published results of drug trials, as an example, the list of authors sometimes strikes me as ridiculously long. I have a hard time imagining how much a young child could contribute that would go beyond simple assisting, but as you point out, what constitutes a significant contribution is highly subjective.</p>
<p>But the father is also listed as one of the author. Clearly, this is an attempt to give their kids a hook for college application. Their oldest probably was a junior and about to apply. The Adcom might see right through it but it is not that strange to me.</p>