Second/Third author?

[inhaledinsult]

Hi,

I was fortunate to be included on a publication recently, and was hoping to talk about it on my application. The thing is, there are two co-first authors, and then my name comes next. Does that make me a second or third author? If it's considered 2nd, I could include it under "Research and Publications," as opposed to the other NAQ categories. 

I've already asked UBC about this, and they said that it's ultimately up to myself to decide. I'm hoping to get some feedback about this topic because I'm not very familiar with the world of academic research, thanks in advance.

[frenchpress]

33 minutes ago, inhaledinsult said:

Hi,

I was fortunate to be included on a publication recently, and was hoping to talk about it on my application. The thing is, there are two co-first authors, and then my name comes next. Does that make me a second or third author? If it's considered 2nd, I could include it under "Research and Publications," as opposed to the other NAQ categories. 

I've already asked UBC about this, and they said that it's ultimately up to myself to decide. I'm hoping to get some feedback about this topic because I'm not very familiar with the world of academic research, thanks in advance.

The point of the 1st or 2nd author cut off is that this section is intended to capture work you were primarily responsible for as an author or co-author. It used to be only 1st author publications, but part of why UBC relaxed this rule is because many people end up as ‘2nd authors’/co-authors when they collaborate very closely with someone on a piece of research on which they’ve done nearly as much or equal work. After that, typically, 3rd authors and so on are more of an ‘assistant’ (except for the last author who is typically the supervisory / PI), where you contributed but weren’t the driving force on the work.

So, I would argue that it depends on what your contribution was. If you feel like you were a legitimate 2nd co-author who really owned or contributed a great deal to the work, close behind the contributions of the co-first authors, then include it. If not, then I would suggest it belongs in the NAQ section.