How much work does a laboratory technician have to do to get his/her name on a paper?

Question

For Professors/Department Heads/Laboratory Managers etc. You guys think up research projects, apply for grants, and then employ research scientists and laboratory technicians. The research scientists collect the samples. The samples are then given to the laboratory technicians, who run assays, etc., turning samples into data, which they give to the research scientists. The research scientists then analyse the data and write the papers. So, a laboratory technician is a kind of alchemist, turning, for example, a blood sample into numbers representing, say, IGF1 content. The research scientists cannot plot blood on a graph, so without the laboratory technician no paper will be written or published. Publications improve your chances of getting further funding for further research projects. Therefore, I think my question deserves an answer.

Answer 1

Not bloody much. Its everyone else that does the hard work. Yes i am a disgruntled lab technician. But no one has asked my to do the work for their paper and they had better not ask me neither. If i do any research work it will be for my own paper, why should i do all the hard work and not get the credit.

Answer 2

I don't think you have an accurate picture of how a lab works.

A typical U.S. university biology lab might have, say, 12 members:
The professor/boss
3 post docs - M.D.s or Ph.D.s who don't yet have their own labs
4 grad students
2 undergraduate lab helpers
2 technicians
and perhaps a secretary for the boss and a lab manager to organize how it all runs.
For a small lab, half all the numbers; for a large lab, double all the numbers except the 2 techs, who might become 3.

The technicians are generally 5 day, 40 hour employees who take care of routine chores like making media and pouring culture plates, or who are used to pursue the bosses own ideas.
The grad students and post docs will work anywhere from 50 - 80 hours per week including weekends, plus they will be reading and writing papers, analyzing data, assembling presentations, networking with other students/post docs and talking science, etc. during their home time. They also often do teaching on the side.
As a result, almost all the data, ideas, publications, etc. are a direct result of the work the students/post docs do, not the technicians. And since a student/post doc has the incentive/pressure that their future depends on his or her own publications, and a student/post doc works twice as many hours at half the pay and benefits of a technician, the bosses prefer to use students/post docs to move the lab forward.

It depends on the lab and the people, of course, but I do think this is typical.

Aside from that, to get on a paper, one is usually expected to have contributed meaningfully to the intellectual basis of the work, not to have poured the agarose plates or made the microscope slides that were used. Thus, in many situations, lab technicians don't make it on to the papers based on merit, unless they are really exceptional - though there are certainly exceptional techs out there, and they do get on papers.

On the other hand, there are also a lot of professors who will allow technicians to be included as authors as a reward for the work, even though they really weren't doing the same sorts of work the other authors were.

It is a tough system and I would guess that everyone in it has been screwed over at least once or twice, but hey, life is tough.

Answer 3

A lab technician can work his/her entire life and never do anything worthy of mention on a paper. The names on the paper are those that contributed to the intellectual content of the paper, not those that collected the data or performed routine support tasks. If you want your name on the paper, find a way to improve the experiment. This is the type of contribution that most scientists will consider worthy of recognition.

Answer 4

This changes from lab to lab. Some include as co-authors people who only did technical work, but mosty co-autorship is earned by making an intellectual contribution.
In my country lab technicians are very rare, research scientists do their own bench work. I realise that technicians can be indispensable for some labs, but the lab food chain generally dictates that they won't get co-autorship.
So If you want to get published you'll have to come up with a project of your own...

Answer 5

A laboratory technician is a slavey. They do work which is generally low level mechanical work. It usually doesnt require much training, or in fact, much in the way of brains. So, unless their boss is a really, really good guy or they put out for him, they arent going to get any of the glory.

Lab Technologists are often certified professionals, often with M.S. degrees. They help design experiments and often are included in the list of authors as a courtesy.

Answer 6

It always depends on the professor who runs the lab. I worked in a lab where the prof. was pretty easygoing, and ended up third author on a paper. If you've performed essential services, and provided input on conclusions or further experimentation, then ask your boss (grad student, postdoc, whatever) to put your name on the paper.

Answer 7

It depends on the lab. My PI treats lab techs very similar to post docs, and consequently, lab techs are commonly primary authors on their own papers (they also handle all of the lab administrative duties as well). As long as you plan accordingly and effectively, there will be more publications. It ends up working fairly well.

Answer 8

a tech will never be first author on a paper however, as long as you contribute to the experiments, your name should be on there somewhere (author or acknowledgment). It all depends on the PI of the lab your working in. Its courteous for them to put your name on it but they don't have to.

Answer 9

If the lab technicians' work is good, the senior team should include him/her on the authorship list.

Answer 10

If you make a significant contribution in the intellectual work, you deserve mentioning.
If all you do is apply standard methods for gathering data, that somebody else told you to gather, then no, you don't deserve mentioning.

Hopefully you get a paycheck though.