How to list coauthors on CV

[Carmen]

Now days, there are many papers published with equal contribution authors. Can one switch his name to the front if he is the second coauthor when writing his own CV?

Thanks for insights!

[Andy]

Carmen,

Play it very safe. Avoid any possibility that someone may think you have misrepresented reality. Therefore, leave the author order as it appears in print, and if you want, use asterisks with a footnote under your \"publications\" section to indicate the equal contribution.

Andy

[Carmen]

I have switched it around when submited my CV for recent job hunting. Have anybody ever done that? Do you think this will cause confusion.

Comments appreciated!

[Paul]

Hi Carmen,

I think its perfectly ok to switch it around. Employers give CV's a glance to look for first authors and, fact is, you ARE first author on those papers so you aren't lying by listing yourself first.

A CV is about promoting yourself and giving yourself the best chance to look good. Take every chance possible to do this.

[Kim]

I would not switch around the order of author names. And I would consider it unethical to do so.

[Goodwin Jinesh]

The first and second authors may have equal contribution workwise but the first author should be the one who put forward the idea first. So there is no question of shifting the author positions.

[Ken]

I was going to ask this question myself. I think "unethical" is an unfair word. Assuming it is a scenario where the two authors are entirely equal in work and ideas (and if they aren't, they shouldn't be listed as "contributed equally" in the first place) then is it fair that one person's CV looks demonstrably inferior due to an accident of alphabetical order?

[Carmen]

Have anybody ever got some ideas from professionals?

Thanks!

[Dave Jensen]

Here's one comment from a professional CV reader . . .

We scan CV's to see first author publications. It's a fact of life. You look a lot better when you are listed as the first co-author, and not the second.

And then I had this great idea, that researchers should "buddy up" in the beginning, with an agreement that it is OK to switch the order on their respective CVs. However, before going ahead and posting that suggestion here, because it is such an emotional issue, I thought I'd ask Beth Fischer, of the University of Pittsburgh's "PhD Survival Skills and Ethics Program." She teaches ethics and job search skills to scientists.

Beth told me "your idea stinks. A person can not change the order of the authors of a publication, for any reason. It isn't ethical." I begged, I pleaded. It just seemed so natural to me for a person to want to put their own name first, for the self-promotional (and very real) impact it makes on their CV. Unfortunately, I couldn't get her buy-in. She did agree with the earlier poster who suggested using an asterick. But I can tell you as a person who reads CVs all day long, no one reads astericks.

Dave Jensen, Moderator
CareerTrax Inc.

[Ken]

I still don't see it as changing the order (which is OBVIOUSLY unethical). If the asterisk is there in the original paper, then author Aaronson and author Zydor are both actually first author, since they can't be superimposed. Zydor's resume now looks bad because of his last name? Sorry, but THAT is unethical. I guess I should be happy that my last name is toward the front of the alphabet.