This whole thread is absurd.
Official Accounting JM Thread 2023
-
Who were they? Not everyone is keeping score at home.
Posts keep deleted. The question was about this sentence:
"Take JC at Boston University as an example. He had a JAE in his first year of the PhD, but only RAed in the later publication rounds of the paper. Before he even got involved the paper was presented at the JAE conference where it was ripped to shreds."
What about the rest? Did all 6 other jmcs made any contribution to the paper or they were all RAs? -
I remember just decade ago there were only 1 or 2 candidates with top 3 pubs. They are the true stars. Nowadays most candidates with top pubs or r&r are added to the projects…. Thr signaling value of top pub is way down…
A senior at my school added a phd student on the job market to a 4th round r&r. I don’t think this is ethical, but the senior says this is just trying to help
-
This is almost certainly unethical. Many publishers have published guidelines regarding what authorship requires. It would be very difficult to contribute sufficiently if added that late.
I remember just decade ago there were only 1 or 2 candidates with top 3 pubs. They are the true stars. Nowadays most candidates with top pubs or r&r are added to the projects…. Thr signaling value of top pub is way down…
A senior at my school added a phd student on the job market to a 4th round r&r. I don’t think this is ethical, but the senior says this is just trying to help
-
A student can be added into R&R projects? Corruption and fraud are verything in this toxic profession
I remember just decade ago there were only 1 or 2 candidates with top 3 pubs. They are the true stars. Nowadays most candidates with top pubs or r&r are added to the projects…. Thr signaling value of top pub is way down…
A senior at my school added a phd student on the job market to a 4th round r&r. I don’t think this is ethical, but the senior says this is just trying to help
-
I remember just decade ago there were only 1 or 2 candidates with top 3 pubs. They are the true stars. Nowadays most candidates with top pubs or r&r are added to the projects…. Thr signaling value of top pub is way down…
A senior at my school added a phd student on the job market to a 4th round r&r. I don’t think this is ethical, but the senior says this is just trying to help
I had my own project and idea, my own data and added a coauthor to better develop my paper.
-
Most journals and editors wouldn’t allow an author to be added after the first round submission.
This is almost certainly unethical. Many publishers have published guidelines regarding what authorship requires. It would be very difficult to contribute sufficiently if added that late.
I remember just decade ago there were only 1 or 2 candidates with top 3 pubs. They are the true stars. Nowadays most candidates with top pubs or r&r are added to the projects…. Thr signaling value of top pub is way down…
A senior at my school added a phd student on the job market to a 4th round r&r. I don’t think this is ethical, but the senior says this is just trying to help
-
I remember just decade ago there were only 1 or 2 candidates with top 3 pubs. They are the true stars. Nowadays most candidates with top pubs or r&r are added to the projects…. Thr signaling value of top pub is way down…
Single authored top 3 pubs or pubs with other PhD students (who are at the same level) still have signaling value.
-
I remember just decade ago there were only 1 or 2 candidates with top 3 pubs. They are the true stars. Nowadays most candidates with top pubs or r&r are added to the projects…. Thr signaling value of top pub is way down…
Single authored top 3 pubs or pubs with other PhD students (who are at the same level) still have signaling value.
A clear research agenda too
-
Not true. I know several cases in top journals.
Most journals and editors wouldn’t allow an author to be added after the first round submission.
This is almost certainly unethical. Many publishers have published guidelines regarding what authorship requires. It would be very difficult to contribute sufficiently if added that late.
I remember just decade ago there were only 1 or 2 candidates with top 3 pubs. They are the true stars. Nowadays most candidates with top pubs or r&r are added to the projects…. Thr signaling value of top pub is way down…
A senior at my school added a phd student on the job market to a 4th round r&r. I don’t think this is ethical, but the senior says this is just trying to help
-
In some limited circumstances it’s ok. Say you need to do a very large revision and you need some help with major empirical aspects that a person has, and they will truly be involved in the project. That seems fine.
But adding two coauthors to a late round JAE seems a bit suspicious, especially when one is a first year PhD student. What do you need two new coauthors for at that stage of the project? What are they both doing that adds substantial value? That’s what the definition of being an author is.
Most journals and editors wouldn’t allow an author to be added after the first round submission.
This is almost certainly unethical. Many publishers have published guidelines regarding what authorship requires. It would be very difficult to contribute sufficiently if added that late.
I remember just decade ago there were only 1 or 2 candidates with top 3 pubs. They are the true stars. Nowadays most candidates with top pubs or r&r are added to the projects…. Thr signaling value of top pub is way down…
A senior at my school added a phd student on the job market to a 4th round r&r. I don’t think this is ethical, but the senior says this is just trying to help
-
The fourth coauthor was added when the paper was 4th round R&R in JAE: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165410117300162
Same thing with this one (4th coauthor added after one coauthor passed away, see the footnote): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-679X.12328
In some limited circumstances it’s ok. Say you need to do a very large revision and you need some help with major empirical aspects that a person has, and they will truly be involved in the project. That seems fine.
But adding two coauthors to a late round JAE seems a bit suspicious, especially when one is a first year PhD student. What do you need two new coauthors for at that stage of the project? What are they both doing that adds substantial value? That’s what the definition of being an author is.Most journals and editors wouldn’t allow an author to be added after the first round submission.
-
The fourth coauthor was added when the paper was 4th round R&R in JAE: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165410117300162
Same thing with this one (4th coauthor added after one coauthor passed away, see the footnote): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-679X.12328In some limited circumstances it’s ok. Say you need to do a very large revision and you need some help with major empirical aspects that a person has, and they will truly be involved in the project. That seems fine.
But adding two coauthors to a late round JAE seems a bit suspicious, especially when one is a first year PhD student. What do you need two new coauthors for at that stage of the project? What are they both doing that adds substantial value? That’s what the definition of being an author is.Most journals and editors wouldn’t allow an author to be added after the first round submission.
The first one looks suspicious
-
First case is ok because KR probably joined to run experiment.
Second case is fishy.The fourth coauthor was added when the paper was 4th round R&R in JAE: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165410117300162
Same thing with this one (4th coauthor added after one coauthor passed away, see the footnote): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1475-679X.12328In some limited circumstances it’s ok. Say you need to do a very large revision and you need some help with major empirical aspects that a person has, and they will truly be involved in the project. That seems fine.
But adding two coauthors to a late round JAE seems a bit suspicious, especially when one is a first year PhD student. What do you need two new coauthors for at that stage of the project? What are they both doing that adds substantial value? That’s what the definition of being an author is.Most journals and editors wouldn’t allow an author to be added after the first round submission.
-
I remember just decade ago there were only 1 or 2 candidates with top 3 pubs. They are the true stars. Nowadays most candidates with top pubs or r&r are added to the projects…. Thr signaling value of top pub is way down…
A senior at my school added a phd student on the job market to a 4th round r&r. I don’t think this is ethical, but the senior says this is just trying to help
I had my own project and idea, my own data and added a coauthor to better develop my paper.
Did you apply to UIUC, Wharton and the rest of the "top" schools. If the answer is yes than I wonder why they didnt hire you!?
-
I remember just decade ago there were only 1 or 2 candidates with top 3 pubs. They are the true stars. Nowadays most candidates with top pubs or r&r are added to the projects…. Thr signaling value of top pub is way down…
A senior at my school added a phd student on the job market to a 4th round r&r. I don’t think this is ethical, but the senior says this is just trying to help
I had my own project and idea, my own data and added a coauthor to better develop my paper.
Did you apply to UIUC, Wharton and the rest of the "top" schools. If the answer is yes than I wonder why they didnt hire you!?
Im not him/her but I guess wharton was busy reading the love letter of CL booth to CS.