A postdoc worked in my research group in early 2021 for 4 months. Unfortunately, things didn't work well (mainly personality issues and toxic behaviour), so I didn't renew their 4-month probation contract. I provided the postdoc with a well-defined problem to research which was a task in my funded project. A 6-page unsubmitted draft was the outcome of our joint work (I worked closely with the postdoc on the problem).
The postdoc recently published a 15-page paper that includes our 6-page draft from 2021 (copied text and equations). I am not included in the author list or the acknowledgment section.
How should I address this situation?
Quote from: theteacher on May 20, 2022, 07:06:07 AM
A postdoc worked in my research group in early 2021 for 4 months. Unfortunately, things didn't work well (mainly personality issues and toxic behaviour), so I didn't renew their 4-month probation contract. I provided the postdoc with a well-defined problem to research which was a task in my funded project. A 6-page unsubmitted draft was the outcome of our joint work (I worked closely with the postdoc on the problem).
The postdoc recently published a 15-page paper that includes our 6-page draft from 2021 (copied text and equations). I am not included in the author list or the acknowledgment section.
How should I address this situation?
I'll let people with specific expertise address the questions about ethics and misconduct.
However, on a more general level, is this really worth pursuing? Beyond not being listed as an author, is there any harm that is going to come to you because of this? Would it somehow cause issues with your funding or your future work? If it will, then you probably need to address it. If the answer is "not really" then I would suggest just letting this go. Given your characterization of this person, this could well become quite ugly. The optics of a tenured professor accusing a postdoc they previously dismissed of misconduct aren't great for you, even if you are clearly in the right. If its possible to just ignore this, that is probably the best way to go.
Besides being a violation of authorship ethics, if this was part of a grant it does have to be addressed, because the grant is supposed to be acknowledged on all grant funded research. First step is to contact the journal-- they should have a procedure for authorship disputes.
I suppose your postdoc works with another faculty member at this point? If so, contacting this faculty member could help. At least, if I were contacted about something like that, I would take it very seriously and do my best to address it properly.
Quote from: Caracal
However, on a more general level, is this really worth pursuing? Beyond not being listed as an author, is there any harm that is going to come to you because of this? Would it somehow cause issues with your funding or your future work? If it will, then you probably need to address it. If the answer is "not really" then I would suggest just letting this go. Given your characterization of this person, this could well become quite ugly. The optics of a tenured professor accusing a postdoc they previously dismissed of misconduct aren't great for you, even if you are clearly in the right. If its possible to just ignore this, that is probably the best way to go.
I'll ignore it. It's another lesson for me to learn.
Quote from: Puget
Besides being a violation of authorship ethics, if this was part of a grant it does have to be addressed, because the grant is supposed to be acknowledged on all grant funded research. First step is to contact the journal-- they should have a procedure for authorship disputes.
Quote from: research_prof on May 20, 2022, 08:28:51 AM
I suppose your postdoc works with another faculty member at this point? If so, contacting this faculty member could help. At least, if I were contacted about something like that, I would take it very seriously and do my best to address it properly.
After leaving my group, the postdoc worked for a university in another state but was dismissed again in 3-5 months. The postdoc now works for their PhD supervisor, a co-author of the 15-page paper. I don't want to interact with those people for my mental health. So, I decided to let it go.
This is a tricky one. Why did you decide not to finish the paper and publish?
If the answer is you didn't think it was an interesting enough result to bother, then I'd probably just let it go. Up to you if you want to contact the authors, may only be worth it if you think they are capable of being reasonable.
I would only pursue the making a big deal out of it and contacting the journal if this is an important result that your lab has continued to work on after the postdoc left. But it doesn't sound like that is the case here.
I wouldn't worry to much about the funding issue, it was only a few months time and hopefully you have other published work you can attribute to the grant. And you can still put the results of the 6 page work into your annual reports if you choose to.
I actually strongly disagree with the advice to let it go. This is the same as theft - it's theft of intellectual property. If there are no repercussions for the post-doc, then they get to continue doing things like this to other people. I would contact the journal and the student, letting them know/reminding them that this material was created in your lab. I would be clear about the expected fix for the problem: which to me would be inclusion as an author on the paper (if that is what you want).
Quote from: bluefooted on May 25, 2022, 07:21:43 AM
I actually strongly disagree with the advice to let it go. This is the same as theft - it's theft of intellectual property. If there are no repercussions for the post-doc, then they get to continue doing things like this to other people. I would contact the journal and the student, letting them know/reminding them that this material was created in your lab. I would be clear about the expected fix for the problem: which to me would be inclusion as an author on the paper (if that is what you want).
Yeah, but teacher is not responsible for upholding the standards of academic integrity throughout the profession. If this was their current student or postdoc who they learned was doing this, they would absolutely need to act. If this person was not crediting one of their current students or postdocs it would also be incumbent on them to do something.
In this case, teacher is not in a position where she has a clear professional responsibility to act. When you're the wronged party, you get to decide if you want to seek redress. I agree that, in general terms, everyone has a responsibility to uphold standards of intellectual integrity. However, that doesn't mean that we have to take on that responsibility in every instance, regardless of the cost and aggravation involved in cases where there isn't a direct responsibility.
If teacher had a good relationship with the students current supervisor, then it would be easy to just send an email saying "hey, saw this publication and this was actually partly based on work. Not a big deal for me or anything, maybe x didn't understand the conventions, but just wanted to give you a heads up on that." However, it sounds like they don't have a great relationship with the advisor and are concerned that the person might react badly to that kind of email. The former postdoc seems like someone who is not going to be reasonable and the whole thing could get really ugly and the circumstances and power dynamics involved could make this look bad for teacher, even though they are in the right.
You just aren't required to get involved. You are allowed to say "not my postdoc anymore, not important enough to make my problem" and move on with your life.
I think that I d contact the PhD advisor (and current coauthor) and note that the work was done while under your supervision, with a grant that should be attributed to the agency and ask IF it is standard at XXUniveristy to permit such behavior?
I think that a non disclosure agreement (or somthing akin to that) should become standard in your lab. That way, should similar activities occur, your university legal staff could have fun. (they get paid whether they work or not and I m sure that they would think that this is 'fun' and would be glad to help out with the follow through!)
You could just say this:
Quotejust send an email saying "hey, saw this publication and this was actually partly based on work. Not a big deal for me or anything, maybe x didn't understand the conventions, but just wanted to give you a heads up on that."
...anyway.
Sometimes when you want to point out something without getting someone's back up, querying the issue on its own terms, assuming the best intentions in the process, will both surface the intention and achieve the expected action.
M.
Some communication with the new lab would be appropriate. If the postdoc still has a lot to learn in order to become an effective scientist, the advisor should be aware the this is an area requiring attention. On the other hand, if the postdoc is going to continue engaging in research misconduct, it is important that each employer not discover that anew.
Quote from: clean on May 25, 2022, 09:54:50 AM
I think that a non disclosure agreement (or somthing akin to that) should become standard in your lab. That way, should similar activities occur, your university legal staff could have fun. (they get paid whether they work or not and I m sure that they would think that this is 'fun' and would be glad to help out with the follow through!)
If the student had listed you as a coauthor, would they be doing anything underhanded?
It seems like these kinds of contracts could potentially be chilling in terms of academic collaboration.
Quote
It seems like these kinds of contracts could potentially be chilling in terms of academic collaboration
Someone works in your lab, under your grant, under your direction, and then publishes the results you directed without your permission or knowledge? How is THAT not chilling in terms of academic collaboration?
Thanks all for the valuable comments!
I just emailed the supervisor, even though I don't expect much out of it :) But I couldn't bury my head in the sand when academic integrity and professional responsibility were mentioned here.
So, it has been more than 10 days since contacting the supervisor. As I expected, I haven't received any response.
CC the dean?
If you want to kick this up the chain, Google the postdoc's new institution's research misconduct policy. Typically, you should be able to find a point of contact (or, in some cases, a hotline/reporting site) for raising these concerns. This should funnel your message into the institution's federally-mandated research integrity process, which has reasonably strict rules about timelines and next steps for processes like these. If you need a hand finding the research misconduct policy for the institution in question, feel free to DM me.
Quote from: hazelshade on June 06, 2022, 03:00:21 PM
If you want to kick this up the chain, Google the postdoc's new institution's research misconduct policy. Typically, you should be able to find a point of contact (or, in some cases, a hotline/reporting site) for raising these concerns. This should funnel your message into the institution's federally-mandated research integrity process, which has reasonably strict rules about timelines and next steps for processes like these. If you need a hand finding the research misconduct policy for the institution in question, feel free to DM me.
To review.
1. It doesn't seem like this has any impact on your research or work.
2. The postdoc seems like someone who might escalate things if challenged.
3. The supervisor seems like they also might be a difficult person and someone you don't have a good relationship with.
Academic integrity and professional responsibility don't mean that you are personally obligated to pursue every instance of academic dishonesty. That would be an absurd standard. To my mind, you have an obligation to act on theft of intellectual property when:
a. Someone under your supervision commits the offense
b. Someone denies attribution or steals something from someone under your supervision.
c. You are tasked with reviewing an article or are in a position of responsibility for a journal.
d. If you know or suspect someone else is being harmed by the theft of intellectual property. (Although if none of the other three apply, I would tend to say in many cases it might be more appropriate to inform the victim and let them pursue it if they choose)
None of those things seem to apply here. Look, I agree that to some extent we are all responsible for maintaining academic integrity. However, in practical terms, that can't be a limitless responsibility that you have to pursue regardless of the costs. You wrote to the advisor letting them know about the issue. If they don't care, that's on them, not you. I just find it strange to argue that you have an obligation now to go report this to a different institutions research integrity process or their dean, or whatever. If nothing else, this becomes a time suck for you, but things like this can get ugly really fast when you aren't dealing with people of good will. Just let it go.
Quote
a. Someone under your supervision commits the offense
b. Someone denies attribution or steals something from someone under your supervision.
d. If you know or suspect someone else is being harmed by the theft of intellectual property.
Maybe I didnt read the OP carefully enough, but I think that these 3 issues have occurred and by Caracal's own reasoning, necessitate following up.
a. The postdoc was under the OPs supervision when the data was stolen.
b. The postdoc HAS denied attribution to the OPs grant and supervision.
d. The current postdoc advisor is now in jeopardy by the postdoc's actions.
In what ways am I misunderstanding this from the OPs posts?
I think contacting the current supervisor is enough. Presumably there are no more results that this postdoc will be publishing from the OP's lab, and the current supervisor got a head's up. Current supervisor might be embarrassed and exasparated.
We had a PhD student move away and then publish a paper based on data from our lab without mentioning the funder or including the main PI as a co-author. PI emailed him to tell him about professional conventions but the truth is that the paper was really, really uninteresting and was published in a very minor journal.
I agree with Dismal and Caracal. So I'll call it a completed task, and I won't follow up with anyone on this.
Thanks, everyone, for the valuable ideas!
Quote from: clean on June 08, 2022, 09:27:57 AM
Quote
a. Someone under your supervision commits the offense
b. Someone denies attribution or steals something from someone under your supervision.
d. If you know or suspect someone else is being harmed by the theft of intellectual property.
Maybe I didnt read the OP carefully enough, but I think that these 3 issues have occurred and by Caracal's own reasoning, necessitate following up.
a. The postdoc was under the OPs supervision when the data was stolen.
b. The postdoc HAS denied attribution to the OPs grant and supervision.
d. The current postdoc advisor is now in jeopardy by the postdoc's actions.
In what ways am I misunderstanding this from the OPs posts?
I don't think we need to belabor this too much since it sounds like the OP has moved on but
a. It doesn't seem like they stole anything while they were under OP's supervision. They were working with OP. The misconduct happened later. Out of curiosity-What is the normal procedure with something like this where someone has worked on a project with someone in a lab and then moved on? If the postdoc had included Teacher as an author on the paper would that be ok? Or would they still need to ask for permission to publish?
b. I think I worded this badly. What I meant was that if another postdoc or student had worked with the OP on this project and they had also not been listed as an author, OP would be obligated to take this further. I guess there's a technical case about the grant, but it doesn't sound like this article is of any great value to anyone.
d. It seems like Teacher has discharged their obligations to the current supervisor by letting them know about the issue. The current supervisor is the one best positioned to handle it. If they choose not to at this point and it comes back to bite them, that's not on the OP.
QuoteIt doesn't seem like they stole anything while they were under OP's supervision.
They stole the results - the data!
Just including someone's name, without permission, would be wrong. Suppose that there were additional problems with the paper (plagiarism?) Adding the other without permission doesnt stain their reputation any less! Im often asked to sign permission (rights) to the paper to the journal, and would not do so without having read the paper! Who knows what other errors an apprentice may have committed.
The degree of apparent room for laxity in interpretation here may be field-specific; the humanities and the sciences see this issue very differently, as I recall.
Data-derived discussions from lab experiments are the hard-won, documented product of grant-funded research: accountability for the use of the data is strictly overseen in the sciences.
I may have gone to a lot of trouble to track down the textual components of a medieval liturgical play, visiting several far-flung libraries, translating all the sources, etc., but that 'data,' rightly or wrongly, doesn't accrue to me in the eyes of the humanities, in the same way...and getting it published can be a bear (15 years and counting)...
Ergo...
M.
Quote from: clean on June 09, 2022, 07:48:48 AM
QuoteIt doesn't seem like they stole anything while they were under OP's supervision.
They stole the results - the data!
Just including someone's name, without permission, would be wrong. Suppose that there were additional problems with the paper (plagiarism?) Adding the other without permission doesnt stain their reputation any less! Im often asked to sign permission (rights) to the paper to the journal, and would not do so without having read the paper! Who knows what other errors an apprentice may have committed.
All I mean is that this isn't someone the OP is now supervising. They did this under someone else's supervision. If the current supervisor was writing and asking if they needed to do something, I'm pretty sure everyone would say "of course, you can't just allow a student to do something like this."
Carcal, there are government grants involved.
You can't overlook stuff where that's the case.
That's why I said above it's different in the humanities and the sciences.
It has to be followed up on.
M.