We all know how it goes—you’re planning the first draft of a manuscript, and your PhD student asks, “Who’s going to be first author on this one?” You pause, remembering that this has been a close collaboration with another group. You push back, “Who do you think should be first author?” and then “What about if you were joint first author with Robin from the other group?” Another pause. And then, “Well, I really did a lot on this one, and it is an important part of my PhD. We could be joint first authors, but I want to be listed first.” The solution seems to work for all parties. Later though, you realize, there is something wrong with this solution. Why are joint first authors not considered truly equal? Why is the order of the authors, both with an asterisk by their name denoting their equal status, important? The example above portrays an issue that has become increasingly common in academic labs.
