Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • 3
    Assuming the paper looks fine, and given that you were, in fact, a contributor, would you rather be (ethically) right and fight incorrect process, or at peace and keep what was in the past, in the past, while focusing on your current life and career? Commented Sep 15, 2021 at 14:06
  • 3
    It's inappropriate to put you on the paper if you wish to be off it. Maybe the authors feared to be even more inappropriate to leave you off, but didn't want to kill the paper (which, strictly spoken, they would have had to do if you refuse to be an author but substantially contributed to it). A dilemma. Unless the quality of the paper is substandard, you disagree with the conclusions or you really didn't contribute at all (but why would they add you then), you might let it slide. If you hate the authors, it means you do not want to work with them in the future. But this work is done. Commented Sep 15, 2021 at 15:08
  • 1
    @gnometorule Well, if I had a firm answer to that, I wouldn't have had to ask the question. You are, of course, right that fighting over this would cost time and aggravation and gain me nothing directly, but then again what good are ethics and norms if we don't enforce them? We know from behavioral economics that people do sometimes incur tangible costs to enforce norms, and if you've ever been in such a situation it's easy to see why. There is something deeply distasteful about watching somebody behaving unethically and just getting away with it.
    – Nobody
    Commented Sep 15, 2021 at 18:53