text:
How to find collaborators for just writing and formatting manuscripts
In our research group we do many things, but have little time for writing papers. Sometimes things like formatting the manuscript for some specific journal or just writing the intro and methods sections can be very easy things if what you do is almost always the same, or you just need to rewrite some parts from one paper to other. This is always (from my opinion) straightforward but needs lots of time. Therefore I started to wonder how could I find people for just writing and formatting manuscript 100% of the time. How would you do this?
P.S. I remember some years ago there were some websites where programmers could interchange between them "services" for free, for instance one would write some C# code if the other one could do a website for the other. Do something like this exist for academics where the services are "writing papers", "formatting grants", "getting bibliography", etc.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because ... it's either a troll or is some other b.s.

why is it a troll? please explain it to me

@paulgarrett The naivete of asking a question to which everybody knows the answer is "no" isn't a reason to close.

@DavidRicherby, the premises were what I objected to.

@paulgarrett , I do not see why; a) my question is naïve, and b) why do you think everybody thinks the answer is "no" (few days ago nobody thought about D. Trump winning the elections btw :-P)

@flow You are asking about whether something exists now, not inviting us to speculate about the future. People's failure to predict the future is irrelevant.

"Therefore I started to wonder how could I find people for just writing and formatting manuscript 100% of the time. How would you do this?" offer them enough money for what is probably a dull and unfulfilling job to be attractive.

I disagree with close votes. Questions for which the answer is "Things don't really work that way" can be helpful to inexperienced academics.

@DikranMarsupial I just offer them co-authorship of the manuscript, I think that is enough

Get a postdoc and make him unhappy and quit. In the meantime, let him write your introduction and format your paper.

Related: How do you call an academic who puts his name on an article he didn't write?

Since this question has moved up in the queue: to me, the premises are self-contradictory. Namely, apparently it is easy and boring and lower-status to write things out, yet of no interest to the group doing the research? If it's really so easy, just do it. If not, then the research group has a deficit in that regard. Further, I don't understand the alleged distinction between doing and documenting the work and writing it up. Piles of data lying around have far to go before being scientific conclusions communicable to other people. So then I wonder if it is a genuine question...

Isn’t this a big reason why professors get grad student RAs?

Is this a graduate research group? It will definitely help clarify some of the responses.

Writing the manuscript is a significant scientific contribution. Is your research so trivial that anybody can interpret the data that you give them and write to a high scientific caliber on them, with no further inputs from you? Most likely, you'd need to also provide them with a rigorous analysis of that data, probably in writing form, since they might no share an office with you, and also for record keeping. That explanation becomes the crux of a paper that you could write yourself in the first place. The time spent explaining the data to someone not involved in an experiment will be greater than just writing the thing yourself. You'd be only saving time on tiny matters of sentence formulation, if you'd even save time at all.
Formatting a paper in my experience doesn't take that much time, so I'm not sure where you're coming from in on that point. Most journals provide you with a template that you can literally copy paste into. If something is straightforward as you say, it shouldn't take that much time at all. If by "getting bibliography", you mean compiling the bibliography, that will also be something that only you, being familiar with the experiment, can provide. A bibliography should be something that arises naturally from the need to reference previous methods/works for your analysis, not a chunk that you copy paste between papers without thoughts.
If you mean that they also do the data analysis, then they just become a regular scientific collaborator, with full authorship rights.

Not enough time to write papers
Producing papers is a core part of your job. You cannot avoid this. Delegating writing (to non co-authors) is surely plagiarism. Nonetheless, you might be able to improve your efficiency.
Writing introduction and methods sections. Presumably, you made some notes when you started work, e.g., you formulated some hypothesis. Instead of writing such notes, you could write the first draft of the introduction.
Bibliography. I'm not sure what "getting [a] bibliography" means. Do you mean writing a "literature review"? If so, then that's something that also comes from your initial notes, when you establish the context of your proposed research in relation to the existing literature.
Co-authors. You can distribute the burden of writing amongst the group. In particular, PhD students can do the vast majority of any writing when they are a co-author.
Formatting manuscripts
This task typically isn't time consuming. Nonetheless, you could always hire an undergraduate to the work. You could hire me too -- but I doubt you could afford me!

"You cannot avoid this. Moreover, doing so is surely plagiarism" Both statements are wrong. By having co-authors who focus on the writing part, one can avoid writing, without committing plagiarism.

I've replaced writing with producing. Regarding "having co-authors who focus on the writing part," that is already clear from my answer, under the heading of co-authors.

Now it's not wrong anymore, but it also does not address the question anymore.

I strongly disagree, but feel free to clarify why you think that.

The assumptions that you operate under, as revealed by your question, would be virulently opposed by the vast majority of academics. You might get a sense of that from the other responses here.
I have come across a number of researchers who share your views. They feel that 'doing research' is more important than writing about it, and time spent writing is time wasted (especially introduction and such). This question here borders on such thinking.
It's absolutely untrue that writing is less important. This  may be a shield to cover up lack of clarity or less critical, inadequate language skills. You should introspect on whether this is the case at your group.
If you want to hire people for money to write for you, those people are likely to be students looking to supplement their income or pay off a loan. The arrangement would probably work, but some people would find this exploitative, like a very mild version of a sweatshop.
If you want to have these writers work for authorship, you are going down a very slippery slope. What happens if the writer disagrees with your research? What if they want to add something of their own? It's quite natural to develop a sense of ownership and accountability after some time; how would you deal with that? How do you 'fire' these people without them raising misconduct claims?
 Note that I'm on pointing out practical difficulties, the ethical considerations that make this a bad idea should already be quite clear to you.
In summary, my advice is, don't. Make time to write, or wait till you have some downtime to write.

In our research group we do many things, but have little time for writing papers.

Typically, a research group applies for grants, and the money pays for PhD students or postdocs who have a strong interest in publishing, so they often do the writing.
But there's an ambiguity in the question about the scope of the "writing" task:

Assuming that the literature review is done, the method is described and the results are analyzed, the job is mostly editorial and the person doing it doesn't need to be an academic: in this case your group can hire a research assistant or contract a company specialized in proofreading/formatting documents. This person wouldn't need to be a co-author (and they probably wouldn't care for it anyway since they are not in the academic system), but they would need to be paid.
If the task involves research skills, for instance the person is in charge of explaining why and how the research is being done, then they must be an academic of some kind and would be a co-author in their own right. It's common to assign this job to a PhD student or postdoc in the lab; if nobody is available, then it's worth extending your collaboration network through people met at conferences for instance. While it's probably possible to find academics just interested in having their name as co-author, most of them would want to participate in the research project from the start, not just helping writing the paper.

This distinction is essential: if it's a real research job, then it cannot be outsourced this way. On the other hand if it's a proofreading/formatting job, then it's possible if there's money to pay for it, even though it's not common.

Formatting of a manuscript to fit the requirements of a specific journal is a nasty work, I must agree. However, I do not know any service to provide that support. Have you tried the Overleaf platform for collaborative drafting of scholarly documents? It's based on Latex but can be also used by non-experts in TeX. Many publishers support their authors by providing them an environment for specific journals at Overleaf. It's then formatted automatically in the right style on the fly.

There seems to be a consensus in the answers given thus far that you cannot hire someone to do the writing part for you. Yes, as a current PhD, I find this answer to be true in my field as well. We all have to do it. Writing will continue to be an important part of your research; you will need to write papers and grants in the future.
In sum, it's part of your job. Just do it.

On the first look the problem of finding collaborators has to do with motivating people and to find people who are interested in a subject. For example, a group is formed around a robotics research project and now the question is why it is so hard to find somebody who likes to fix the typos in a manuscript or likes to write the introduction. But what exactly motivates people to contribute to a project? Is it only money or has it to do with the academic subject? The answer is a bit more complicated. It has to do why a certain project is done by a group of people.
A research project doesn't start by itself. In most cases, the environment of a research group assigns a question to a group. A typical example is, that a university likes to figure out how to program a computer vision system for a biped robot and assigns this task to a workgroup. The reason why the people in the group are motivated is not because they are interested in the task itself, but they would like to do the job for the university.
Answer the problem of how to find collaborators is possible by referencing to the external customer of a research project. A research group can announce, that they have the assignment of a concrete customer and then the question is which authors likes to do the job too. Individuals are not motivated by money or the subject, but they would like to contribute to a certain external customer.


text:
Are abstracts confidential during the review process?
In an answer to a question about the confidentiality of reviews, I basically said you cannot reveal information about the review until the paper is publicly available. This question about revealing information after publication is making me rethink my answer. The question I have is, is the information (e.g., title, authors and abstract) that you are given to decide if you want to review confidential?
It seems to me that the process of agreeing to do a review is NOT

Please review our reviewer guidelines (including confidentiality policies),
If you accept these guidelines please look at this abstract and let
us know if you want to review.

Rather, it seems it is

Please look at this abstract
If it interests you, please consider our review guidelines.

This suggests to me that the initial information (title, authors and abstract in a non double blind review) are not confidential.

Care to explain the down vote?

I do not think it is useful to ask "is this-and-this information that I receive at this-and-this phase of the review process confidential", as the rule is simply that all information that you receive during the review process is confidential.

I think the question is very good. I would like to hear from experienced programme chairs, or journal editors. As somebody below noted, this is kind of a gray area and we can elaborate as much as we want on common sense, nevertheless, but I think it comes down to real experience with this kind of situation. I guess it would come up as a case of scientific misconduct somewhere.

Let me emphasize one sentence from Jukka's comment: ALL information that you receive or generate during the review process is confidential.  The answer to any question of the form "But can I leak this information at this stage of the process?" is NO.  (I'm both an experienced reviewer and a journal editor.)

To complement other answers and comments: indeed, as far as I can tell, from a quasi-legalistic viewpoint "consent" cannot be pushed on me by sending me something in email, e.g., an abstract and asking whether I'd review the article. Nevertheless, it is my firm impression that, there is a strong expectation that any such information is kept confidential in perpetuity, whether or not one agrees to referee/review.
Yes, I agree, there is something a touch unfair or burdensome about this, since one can imagine that a malicious editor could wreak havoc with one's work by sending a steady stream of one's competitors' as-yet-unpublished work... thus seemingly obliging one to disrupt one's own work... ?
And, yes, something like this does sometimes happen when one served as NSF reviewer (in the older system), especially, where work-in-progress is sometimes portrayed.
Despite the potential for abuse in having others put obligations upon us, it seems that the potential for abuse, in the line of "conflict of interest", is substantially greater if confidentiality is not essentially promised implicitly, and in perpetuity.

I checked the peer review policy of Nature and Science, I guess that should is the best we can get. The policy can be found here, here (both Nature) and here (Science).
A bunch of relevant quotes from the Nature policies:

As a condition of agreeing to assess the manuscript, all reviewers undertake to keep submitted manuscripts and associated data confidential...
Nature journals keep confidential all details about a submitted manuscript and do not comment to any outside organization ...
Referees of manuscripts submitted to Nature journals undertake in advance to maintain confidentiality of manuscripts and any associated supplementary data.

And some from the Science review policy:

Reviewers are contacted before being sent a paper and are asked to return comments within 1 to 2 weeks for most papers.
The submitted manuscript is a privileged communication and must be treated as a confidential document.

I would read it conservatively. That is, consider an abstract to be a part of the manuscript, hence the same rules governing general manuscript should apply. Apart from that, both journals state that in advance to being sent the manuscript, the (I guess still potential) reviewers agree to keep the matter confident.
I think an answer may also lie in the exact process handling review. First, a potential reviewer is invited and sees a title and possibly paper's authors. Then he/she has to log-in into a review system, but I guess, somewhere in the process accepts general terms and conditions which established the contract. And only then the reviewer sees the manuscript. I am not sure if all journals do it this way, but those I reviewed for did so. Well, besides some special issues handled outside the journal submission/review system, where the case would be unclear.

I just checked the reviewer invitations I received from journals in my field and I found that the only disclosed thing in the invitation e-mails was the submission's title. I must accept/decline to review and only afterwards I saw the manuscript, or its abstract.

I think the policy statement of Science is unambiguous on this issue… while others are not. In doubt, stay on the safe side :)

Well, as you said, there is no rule that explicitly says that the information mentioned in a “invitation to review” is confidential. Yet, as with the related questions, there is a big grey area around the process of peer-review. Many people would expect this information to be kept confidential… and it does make sense: after all, the reason you gained access to what is (at that stage) privileged information is for the purpose that you may review it. It is part of the review process.
Let's see it another way: this situation is not so different from the case where you would accept a review, then drop it (write to the editor to pull out) upon learning that you won't have time to do it. Morally, those two situations are close to one another.

In the dropped out review situation you have agreed to keeping the information confidential so I don't see it as being similar at all.

@DanielE.Shub in the journals I review for, the agreement is implicit… so I don't see why it couldn't be said that your agreed at the moment where you read the abstract in the invitation email.

You agreed the moment you decided to become a scientist. It is not a contract between the referee and a specific journal that you sign each time when someone asks you to review a paper. It is a single lifetime-long contract between the referee and the scientific community.

Because consent doesn't work that way.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
Printing a poster at the conference
While peripherally related to Flying with a poster tube as a hand luggage, I am trying to avoid this. I would like to print my poster at the conference. I am considering this for two reasons. First, it means I don't have to fly with the poster. Second, it gives me a few extra days to work on the poster.
I can see three potential drawbacks.

Being unable to print the poster when you get to the conference. I
have lots of experience printing posters at my university, but no
experience in the conference city
Not being prepared/able to return with the poster to hang in the lab
Getting reimbursed for printing charges

As for point 1, the conference is in a major US city with at least 4 Kinkos (large scale professional print shops) within reasonable walking distance of the venue. My poster is not until day 4 of the conference and I am arriving 1 day early. On point 2, I do not plan on hanging this poster in my lab. I am a little worried about getting reimbursed, but our on-line reimbursement system has a category for printing charges. If I cannot get reimbursed, I am willing to pay out of pocket.
Am I missing anything that can go horrendously wrong with this plan?

How could it possibly go wrong?

I assume you are bringing an electronic copy of the poster with you, say, on a USB memory stick or hard drive.  These could be damaged or lost.  You might want to e-mail yourself a copy of the poster to be safe.

All hail to Dropbox

Regarding flying with posters, I have two words for you: cloth posters!

I agree with @F'x. Canvas posters are the best solution. They look exactly the same, but fold up in your luggage. Problem solved

@Falko: and you can warp your graphs to make them look more linear :-P

Reimbursement is related to a particular institute's policy; and taking by plane - to a particular airline's policy, so I won't speak about it.

Being unable to print the poster when you get to the conference.

Possible problems with printing facilities:

they may by further from the conference venue than expected (or not as easy to get to them, or masked so it's they are not easy to find even if you are nearby),
delays larger than you expect (at least assume "the next day", in general or due to other prints ordered),
page can be out-of-date, or they may be not working for some reason,
they may not print A0 format (permanently or temporarily),
local holidays (or local customs related to working hours) may be different.

(I printed posters on-site two times, and it went almost without problems; some of people I knew had problems, especially with instant printing and poster sizes).

+1 for local holidays (especially if you go to a different country)

I think this is the best answer, but I also think that having enough time to handle travel delays and/or sickness is important.

If you're not worried about transporting the poster or getting reimbursed, and the destination city has the same facilities as your home location, then there's no functional difference between printing locally and remotely.
In other words, once you define away all the differences, the two scenarios are the same :)

Printing at a conference is absolutely no problem. Many conference centers and associated hotels have print shops and Kinko's sprinkled around specifically for people at conferences and meetings to use for print posters, handouts, and other things. You can usually call and in advance and send in some material if you like and it will be ready to print out when you arrive.
In fact, the times I've gone to Kinko's near a conference on similar errands, there were other people from the conference waiting in line to do the same thing.
If you're presenting the first morning of the conference and getting in the night before, you might want to roll it up. Otherwise, you'll lose no sleep and shouldn't have an issue. The only real downside is that it will probably be more expensive than doing it at your university.

I had your problem 1 when I accidentally forgot the poster tube in the taxi when I arrived at my hotel. The problem was I arrived on Saturday and the poster session was on Sunday. For your case, where you have four days, there probably shouldn't be a problem, especially with so many print shops within walking distance. You could even perhaps arrange for the poster to be sent online before your arrival, and pick it up when you get there.

This is not to scare you but what if you fall sick and lose the 3 or 4 extra days you have.
Remember it is a new place you are going so things may not be as familiar as at home.
Its good to prepare in advance. Perhaps you can forward your poster in advance and collect it on your arrival.

If Daniel falls so unbelievably sick he can't find time to print his poster over 3-4 days, he probably shouldn't show up to present it or can ask a colleague instead.

@BenjaminMakoHill Didn't he ask what could horrendously go wrong!

Oh yes! And he could be hit by a meteor and incinerated instantly as well. This would also keep him from printing his poster. ;)

@BenjaminMakoHill The statistical probability of that happening is quite low though :)

I think 3-4 days protects me, but anything less than 2-3 days may not be enough . A one day delay on a flight and being sick the next day might mean you have no poster for a colleague to present

The plan's fine.
Be sure to check if you only need to submit the poster to print and then return to get it, or if they require you to verify a proof first. Some print shops may refuse to print unless you sign off on the proof first, so be sure you ask about that so you can plan if you need to make more than one trip.
If you want to be the local hero, buy thumbtacks and scotch tape for your poster while you're out and be the envy of all of the poster presenters, as well as the conference organizers, who will undoubtedly have forgotten to bring one or both of those things. ;)

I do not see any reason why you would not be able to print your poster at arrival. In the past, I have used fedex (or whatever is easy) to ship the poster to my hotel. That way, the poster is waiting for you when you get there. You do not have to carry it on the plane and no need to stress about Kinkos not wanting to print your posters...

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Need help distinguishing between a primary and secondary source
I am trying to figure out if the following article is a primary or secondary source.
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/20/5/547.full.pdf
I'm leaning towards secondary but here are my cases for both.
Primary: Published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Secondary: It seems to be mostly a summary of other works so it might not be original research.
Can anyone confirm this for me? Thank you!

This question could be improved by specifying its disciplinary specificity as these terms are highly discipline specific.

Primary source material is "direct evidence." This can include published reports of original research, but also journals, diaries, direct interviews, government records, and other types of "produced" work. (It need not be a research or scholarly work to be a direct source; thus the claim that it's primary because it's published in a peer-reviewed journal carries no weight in this argument.)
On the other hand, a secondary source is a source which reports on the work of others, whether it is published or not. Citing a secondary work does not make it a primary work; it's the relationship of the cited work to the original subject that determines if it's primary or secondary.
In this case, a "Perspective" column that summarizes ongoing work in the field is a secondary source, as it is analyzing the original work of others.

In case of review articles, the original sources which were used to create the text are the primary literature. But, if the author draws own conclusions, creates statistics, etc., this would be considered a primary source.
I'm not deep enough in the field to judge that for the article in question.


text:
Regarding Phd in distance learning mode
I hold a bachelors in Engineering from an Indian university and have six years of work experience in the software industry. Is there any foreign university that offers a PhD related to finance in distance learning mode?

Sure there are.

@J.R.: Heh. The top hit is an MIT web page saying "we do not offer a distance learning degree".

@Nate - I wasn't sure if this was even on-topic. Moreover, I'd be surprised if every hit was a "we do not offer..." hit.

@J.R.: I know, I just thought it was funny.

@J.R. - Even I am seeking answer for the same question, I did M.Phill(Comp.Sc.) from a reputed Indian University and got job in a Software Company, now I want to go for Ph.D(Comp.Sc.), if I will go for this  http://www.open.ac.uk or any foreign university then how I can get the things done, are these online courses and if I completed is this degree approved in India by UGC.
Sorry for length comments ;)

To be honest, most PhDs can probably be (largely) conducted at distance. I live quite a way from the University at which I'm registered for my psychology PhD. However, you might want to try contacting the Open University http://www.open.ac.uk which is the UK's very highly regarded distance learning University. They do offer PhDs and I would assume that since they are geared up for distance work they might be one of your best options.


text:
Is paper reviewing for journals that are not JCR-listed worth the time?
Is it worthwhile to spend some time as reviewer of journals which are not JCR-indexed? I do not know in the rest of the world, but in Spain all that matters are those listed in JCR.
NOTE: I am a robotics PhD student yet, and I probably should focus on my research now.

Are you asking whether reviewing papers for reputable journals is a good use of time (already asked and answered) or whether reviewing for disreputable journals is a good use of time? Please [edit] your post to clarify.

I modified the question, is it better this way?

JCR is far more meaningful in some fields than others. (In my field, for example, it is absolutely meaningless for judging the value of a publication.) Please [edit] your post to specify what field you are in.

Could you explain what JCR is?

In some countries JCR means everything and non-JCR is wasted time. So in some places it means a lot.

@NateEldredge Journal Citations Report, if I am correct is a Thomson Reuters' indexing of those supposed to be the best (or good enough) scientific journals.

My general answer would be yes. Doing reviews provides several benefits, first, you will see manuscripts before they are published. You will spend time reading new research in detail in a way you probably would not otherwise. You can use the experience to learn about how to write (or how not to write) a manuscript. You will contribute to your field as is expected from all scientists. Being appointed to review also signals someone has identified you as a possible expert in the field.
There are, however, some possible caveats. You should not spend time on manuscripts from disreputable journals. One way to gain insight into this is to ask your advisor about the journal if you do not feel you have the insight yourself. If the manuscript is far removed from your own work, you should probably also decline with the comment that it is not within your expertise.
It is true that this will take time off from your PhD work to some extent but you will be able to learn from the experience if you consider the process of evaluating work and assessing the standard in which manuscripts are submitted. Of course, one review, will not give you all insights, but given that you do a few during your PhD time, you will gain new insights into the publishing world other than submitting and revising your own work.
A final point: reviewing for a JCR journal or a journal that is not listed should not differ. The review work is equally important for all publications. A journal that is not listed can become listed if published work is of high quality and thereby referenced sufficiently.


text:
Should I contact the journal after "with editor" for two months?
I submitted a paper to an Elsevier journal two months ago. I checked the status today and it was "with editor". I understand the reviewing process may take a while, but apparently it is not under review yet. I did a bit research and found that most papers in the journal are accepted less than 6 months. I am wondering if it is appropriate for me to send inquiry message to the editor in this case? Or a more general question is how long should I wait till sending them inquiry/reminder messages. Thanks.

You can always send a message to an editor to enquire about the status of your manuscript. But, you need to consider a few basic points.
First, try to assess how the journal operates, for example what time frames are usually met by people submitting work to the journal. Try also to see what is considered the norm in your field (assuming this journal is in that field). Since the way journals operate varies between both fields and amongst the journals themselves, you need to assess what is a reasonable time.
Second, Try to see if you can figure out what this message "with the editor" means. I would interpret it as not having been sent out for review yet. If that is true then it seems like posing a question would be timely. If the message indicates the paper may also be under review or possibly even back after review for the editor to evaluate, then two months is certainly not too long. So, understanding the process stages and how the messages relate to these may help you decide whether a request is timely or not.
Editors, should not mind responding to brief questions of this sort but if it is clear from their point that the request is clearly premature, it will add to the stress. In other words, an assessment from your side of the normal waiting time along with an appropriate question is a good ground for the communication. Such an assessment can be made by asking your peers and others who have submitted to the journal. You can also kindly ask the editor to provide some insights into the time frame of the review process. It is after all not uncommon that authors may be more or less ready to handle revisions at different times and knowing what to expect is therefore useful.


text:
'Etiquette' of including course lecturer as author in a paper
Consider please the two following cases:

I took a graduate course, and I naturally did the final project on something related to my research subject. I got a nice conclusion from it. It wasn't nearly enough for publication, but I later on wrote a paper that had included material I got doing my course project. The 'size' of contribution (if that has any relevance) was about half a column from the entire paper. The course lecturer hadn't helped me especially, i.e. we didn't remotely discuss publishing anything.
I did another graduate course, in which the lecturer talked about his own research. Later on, unrelated to the course, I used the methods he taught and wrote a paper based on it.

These are two unrelated cases.
I was wondering if the lecturers should be included as authors in a paper in either case.

Was the lecturer in case 2 using standard methods you could have learned anywhere? Did he publish any papers using those methods that you could cite in your methods section instead of making him an author?

He indeed published, and I cited his work. In principle I could have learned this 'anywhere', but it would be difficult since there are no coursebooks in this subject as it's rather new/state-of-the-art.

I think you did all you should do then. Simply lecturing on a method doesn't make you an author. If so, every biochem professor who mentioned SDS-PAGE would have a ton of publications.

Authorship is reserved for people who contribute to the scientific output of the article. It is not clear to me that the cases you mention qualify although they could. The Vancouver Protocol (here as given by the ICMJE) provide a good basis for assessing authorship. If your course lecturer fulfil these criteria and thus actively participate in the creation of the article then all is fine. If the lecturer takes no active part then the appropriate way would be to place a note in the acknowledgement of the contribution.


text:
Why does the APA/MLA format suggest the use of double-spacing?
For someone used to reading the typical single-spaced double-column ACM-styled papers, this format seems odd.
At first, I thought it's maybe because some people read better with it. However, I haven't found any evidence that suggests so.
In fact, afaict, the benefits in doing otherwise are;
less paper to print, thus saving trees.
less paper to shuffle around.
less time spent flipping pages to and fro to see math definitions because, for instance, some linear program took half a page.
faster identification of paragraphs (since double-spaces would be used only to demarcate paragraphs).
One might say that it promotes consistency. Even though I would disagree to that notion, I still don't get why they would even choose such an unwieldy format in the first place. Is this just one of those rules people don't question because "it's the way it's always been done" or am I missing something here?

You need to separate authoring the manuscript from the finished type-set layout of the journal. For manuscripts more loosely spaced single column format has been the norm. This is because before the digital age, manuscripts were handed in written on a type writer. There was no means for an author to produce sophisticated layouts. In addition, one would add comments manually in the manuscript which is why some journals also specify fiarly wide margins. The marked-up manuscript would then be sent by regular post to the editor and passed on to the author. The one column loosely spaced format has stayed although it is not necessary. That said, reading a loosely spaced single column manuscript is easier than a densely set double column format. The latter is of course more cost effective to print.
Many journals use (or at least allow) LaTeX templates for their submission. These commonly include settings for a "manuscript mode" which end up as single column, loosely spaced text but also a "layout mode" where the author can try the final format of the journal to assess the length of the finished paper. This also allows the journal to more or less automatically type set the final paper once it is accepted.
So the recommendation for manuscripts to be typed loosely spaced and single column, is partly tradition but also because that format is easier to read for the reviewer.


text:
Easier tracking of continuing professional development (CPD)
I am required to report my CPD efforts every semester. This lead me this ask this question. However, I find myself spending more time than I would like just keeping track of what I have read.
I guess there is a natural trade off between "doing what you do" and "tracking what you do" but, at present, my time is quite constrained. In order to get more done, and to maintain my focus while doing it, I would like some way to automate the tracking of what I read.
I have been using Mendeley and like it quite a bit. It seems a natural for that software to be able to report what you have read in the past n-months but I do not see that. While I can see everything I have read, I cannot see everything I have read in the past 6 or even 12 months (I can, however, see what I have "added" but I might add an article today but only read it 8 months from now).
Is there anyway to make tracking what you read easier

This isn't exactly the same, but I think might be a useful solution for you as well: for things like tracking travel planning or publications in process, I maintain spreadsheets for myself that track both each item and the workflow for dealing with it in little chunks over a long period of time.  In each spreadsheet, I maintain one sheet per year, so that things don't become too crowded.  I then keep all of my key workflow charts open in the background, such that it takes me only about 15 seconds to tab over, make an entry, and return.
Something similar might work for you on tracking CPD.  Have a column for the items in you queue, another column for when you actually start reading it, and a third for when you finish reading it.  It's not automated, but it's lightweight enough that if you get in the habit of tracking, you should be able to do it with minimal time cost.

Actually, this is exactly what I do now...I'm just looking for a way to (a) save a little time, and (b) avoid forgetting to log something.


text:
MOOC / video integration into classroom schedule
Please forgive the rambling intro...
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are all the rage when people write about teaching. So many articles have been written about MOOCs killing universities while others complain about the attention. Some have even discussed some community colleges using MOOCs with the classroom teacher filling more of a tutorial role using MOOCs for the bulk of their material.
As I reflect on my own classroom experience (as a lecturer) I find that a lot of my time is spent covering the basics while it would be much more interesting to focus on higher-level concepts. However, in the end, I have only a certain number of hours in the class with my students. If I have 60 hours and it takes 50 hours to cover the basics, there is little time remaining to cover much in the way of higher-level ideas.
So, I've been considering assigning MOOC videos as homework and using class time as discussion time, much the way one would using the case method. While my experience with the case method has not been fantastic, I'm not ready to give up on it yet.
My question is: What is the best way to integrate MOOC videos or other videos as part of the curriculum? Are there any major pitfalls that I should consider before completing my plan for the coming semester?

Though this is an old question, I'm a bit surprised that your university allows you to do this, because I see it as a way to artificially increase the amount of lecture hours.

The best way to integrate off-line video content into a face-to-face course is to make the videos worth watching in the first place. If the videos are not well-made, or if they are too long, or if they are only tangentially related to the topic at hand, there's a good chance students won't bother to spend time watching the videos.
However, if students can learn basic information effectively in a relatively short amount of time, and you structure the class so that this information is needed to complete their homework assignments, there's a good chance they'll start learning from the videos.
The videos need not be MOOC videos. A video can be something from the Kahn academy, something you found on YouTube, or something you create on your campus.
Does your institution have a Center or Office that helps professors with DL classes? If so, they may have equipment and expertise to help you create your own videos, if you have trouble finding existing content to fit your needs, and have determined that that's your best course of action.
Once you have a collection of suitable videos ready to integrate into the course, I'd avoid telling the students that the videos are mandatory viewing. Instead, I'd simply make this a commonly-heard refrain in your class:

And then you complete the problem by doing X, but X is something we're not going to cover in class. If you're not sure how to do X, I've posted a link to a video.

If you make the video something that they need to watch before class, there's a high chance the students won't bother. But, if watching it will help them complete a homework assignment, I think the chances are much better. There's a tangible reward for watching the video; it becomes a worthwhile time investment. It helps if the videos are short – say, 10 minutes at most.
So, I'd try to structure the course such that the videos are assigned, and they are tied to a written homework assignment that will be turned in. You can then start covering the more advanced material in class after the students have turned in the assignment, with a bit more assurance that a majority of the students have really watched the video.
I'd also explain up front (in the course syllabus) why you are leveraging videos in the first place. Tell them directly that your aim is to exploit technology. Explain that spending class time covering basic concepts is not an effective use of class time, now that we are in the age of YouTube and the Internet, and there are other ways they can learn.
Use the Discussion Board feature of your institution's LMS so that students can ask questions if they've watched the video, but are still confused about something. That way, you won't create the impression that you're just trying to take the easy way out with a detached teaching style, but that you are instead striving to leverage technology in multiple ways to create a more effective learning climate overall.
Lastly, try to post the video links in your LMS in a way that you'll be able to see which students have opened the videos, and which students haven't bothered. Such reports aren't foolproof (just because a student clicked on a link doesn't mean they've actually watched the video attentively, e.g.). However, it might be worth knowing that, in a class of 23, only 8 students have even bothered to open the video.

Very useful points. Thanks. I do wish my university has a LMS or DL or anything related to technology. The technology I use I have to find or build myself. Still, your point on requiring for discussion vs. needed for homework is quite helpful. Cheers!

I use a flipped classroom for one of the classes I teach, and I use the following three methods to check whether students are actually watching them:

I do a quiz every single time on the content of the videos.  Don't watch it and don't do well.
I provide students a chance to ask questions at the beginning of class. (This happens before the quiz. Depending on how hard the video was a complete lack of questions is a dead tell that either this year's students are all geniuses or few people watched it).
I can estimate (roughly) from the view counts on the videos if the students are watching them.


text:
How can I introduce a fourth reason after having stated that there are three main reasons?
In an academic paper, I have written "There are three main arguments for why X is not Z."
I have then discussed them like this:

"First, .... (of medium length)
  The second argument is that ... (a bit long)
  The third and most important argument is that ... (longer)" **

** I did not simply use "First,... Second,... Third..." because there is some distance between the arguments. For example, the second argument is two pages long. I think writing "The third and most important argument ..." reminds the reader what these arguments are for.

Now I have realized that I have to make one more argument. And I want to start with "A fourth argument is that ..." after the third one.
Is it a problem that I stated in the beginning that I will give "three main arguments", but I give four? I don't want to say "four main arguments".
The three main arguments are widely discussed by experts in the field. The fourth argument is something that has only been pointed out (in two lines) by one author. The Thing is, my supervisor likes this fourth argument and thinks I should include it in my paper. That is why I want to mention it. I don't want to say that it is trivial because it can become important sometime in the future - just that it is not a main argument (or widely discussed) for why X is not Z.
What is the best way to introduce the fourth argument after the third while maintaining that the first three are the main arguments?

"In addition to these three main reasons, there are cases where..."

Don't do it like this :-).

If you've got 3 stuck in your head but need 4, think out of the box: Just say "There are four main reasons:". You are finding yourself constrained by what you had previously written. You need to break out of this and consider everything you wrote before as mutable.

@WolfgangBangerth But the fourth isn't a "main" reason. It has only been brought up by one study, where as the other 3 have been discussed in 10 to 15 studies.

@joriki. I had a feeling what I would see when I clicked that

Consider putting the main/third argument first. There's a balance between "getting to the point" before readers abandon and using build-up/litany as a rhetorical device.

@ScottSeidman Are you saying you expected it?

@AlQ would it be true to say that there are three traditional arguments, but in this case a fourth is also of interest (or something similar)? Or "While we normally consider 3 arguments for..., I'd like to draw your attention to a fourth.  This is still being developed but is interesting because..."?  Or would that misrepresent the situation

@ChrisH I think that fits the scenario pretty well.

I did not simply use "First,... Second,... Third..." because there is some distance between the arguments.

I suggest that you open with:
There are three main arguments for why X is not Z: A, B, and C.
Then, rather than First, .... (of medium length)
The second argument is that ... (a bit long)
The third and most important argument is that ... (longer), you can use A, B, and C as section/subsection/paragraph headers.

Now I have realized that I have to make one more argument. And I want to start with "A fourth argument is that ..." after the third one. Is it a problem that I stated in the beginning that I will give "three main arguments" but I give four? I don't want to say "four main arguments".

That's a problem, just write There are four main arguments for why X is not Z: A, B, C, and D. and use D as a heading.

The three main arguments are widely discussed by experts in the field. The fourth argument is something that has only been pointed out (in two lines) by one author.

You could revise the opening as:
The literature agrees upon three arguments for why X is not Z: A, B, and C [1,2,3,4,5].
And follow that with:
A fourth argument has also been identified: D [6].

To learn how to keep piling on arguments, take a page out from why "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition." (Google it)

Yes, I'd have a section "Why X is not Z" with an introduction along the lines of "there are 3 main arguments...A, B, and C. A fourth (D) is also discussed." then subsections for each arguments.  Paragraphs would work if they were shorter, but id they run to multiple pages it';s worth using (sub-)subsections so they appear in the contents.  That also means it's worth listing/introducing them.  I don't use paragraph headings but instead structure the paragraph to start with the key phrase in italics

Introduce all four reasons in the introduction and use them as a structuring device for your presentation. You may set the fourth reason apart, if you want to highlight it as different from the first three, like so:

Conventional wisdom holds that in order to effectively flab widgets,
  one needs to consider three factors: First, ... Second, ... Third,
  .... However, as detailed in section X of this contribution, a
  fourth factor is no less important: namely, the effectiveness of the flabbing process depends largely on the type of widget concerned.

"There are four arguments for why X is not Z."

You could expand this answer by elaborating on why you suggest this.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Should I tell my supervisor that I added his/her name as a reference for my next academic position?
Recently I finished my PhD level and I did an interview with a research group for a postdoc position. After my review, they asked me for some references to contact them.
I choose my supervisor and other visiting professors as references.
At this point, should I contact each of the professors that I added in my references list (including my supervisor) and tell them that they might be contacted soon to be asked about me?
I am asking this question as I am not good in "academic protocols". It could be yes (kind of respect as I am asking for his/her "help"), or no (it's something obvious that s/he could be asked by someone about his/her students).

Why the downvote(s)?

You should ask anyone who you intend to serve as your reference if they are ok with it, before doing so. It’s not an academic thing especially; same in other situations.

Thanks @gnometorule .. I think your answer is reasonable.

Yes, let them know and probably apologize for not asking first. I doubt there will be any problem.

Never, ever, use another's name for anything without asking first.

Echoing everyone else's comments... :)  For that matter, if you do not ask/request in advance, you may be unpleasantly surprised that someone's perception of you is not as positive as you might have thought. So you should give people a chance to not be a reference, by asking something like "would you be willing to give me a helpful/positive reference [letter]?" Not just a letter/reference, but a helpful one. Some letter writers do not realize they should simply refuse... to inadvertently, thoughtlessly condemn the applicant.

@BobBrown Not even to nominate them for a prize? I think what you mean is: Don't use their name in a way that implies they know or agree to something that they don't. This requires understanding which uses of someone's name imply such things. There are many that don't and are fine, like citing someone's work.

@nanoman The person that wishes the reference should not name a referee without their consent. This is quite different from a nomination.

Yes absolutely, no-one likes getting a reference request out of the blue.  I actually first learned this at school when I put my personal tutor's name down as a reference for work experience or something like that and he told me that you always need to ask permission first before putting them down as a reference.

@nanoman Nope, not even to nominate someone for a prize.  I am reminded of David Bowie declining a CBE and Marlon Brando boycotting the Academy Awards. And then there's this one: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/103150/16183

Your supervisor has a moral duty to provide a reference for you, but it's still polite to ask. Not least because it's usually best to check whether they'll give you a good one.

@BobBrown that is too strong a statement. For example, one normally does not ask each (or any) author of a paper before citing the paper.

Your supervisor has a moral duty to provide a reference for you — No, your supervisor has a moral duty to help you.  If they believe that they cannot write you a helpful letter, they have a moral duty not to provide a letter.

@wimi  OK, I concede that citing another's published works doesn't need permission.  I'd argue that citing a personal communication does, however.  I can't edit my comment, so how about this: You need permission for anything that implies an obligation, however small, or reveals information not already public.

I do not need permission to list @BobBrown as a professional reference.  However, to do so would be unwise because Bob Brown does not know me professionally and so honest replies would be "I don't know this guy.", "I can not recommend this guy.", etc.  Why would I do that when there are people who do know me and will say nice things about me? How do I know they will say nice things about me? because I asked them.  Even though "I don't know this guy" is not technically a bad reference, most people would infer a bad reference.

@emory Oh, you can absolutely use my name without permission.  The question, however, was "should I?" not "can I?"  If, to follow your hypothetical, you were to do so, I'd say, "I've never heard of this guy.  Someone who will fabricate a reference may have other bad habits."  So, if we don't know each other, you should not give my name as a reference.  To be at least relatively certain of a good reference, you should ask in advance.

Of course you should, from both common courtesy and professional ethics.

@BobBrown I would hope that OP has a much, much better relation with his supervisor than I with you and asking would be unnecessary.

You should ask anyone who you intend to serve as your reference if they are OK with it, before doing so. It’s not an academic thing specifically; the same would apply in other situations.

Comment copied to answer, as suggested by @Buffy.

While correct, this answer doesn't answer OP's question and isn't helpful in the current situation. PLL's answer below fits better I think.

The answer can be paraphrased as "No, you need to apologise in person immediately" which is entirely adequate.

As gnometorule’s answer says, in general, you should ask permission in advance (for a reference, and generally for anything which is implicitly making a commitment for someone).
But the question asks about a situation where you have already given someone’s name as a reference without asking them — partly through inexperience, and partly because of being put on the spot after the interview rather than asked earlier in the application.  Given that, I suggest writing to the referees as soon as possible to let them know, apologise for not asking first, and check whether they’re OK with it.  The letter could look something like the following:

Dear XXXX, Following an interview for YYYY, I was asked to provide some names of possible references, and I gave your name as one possibility.  I’m sorry I hadn’t asked you about this in advance, so I’d like to check now whether you are happy to act as a reference for me?  If not, please let me know, and I can contact YYYY to take your name off the list.

The given situation isn’t ideal, but it’s not terrible either — it’s quite understandable how it arose, and I don’t think most referees would be particularly upset by it.  Just try to avoid it happening again.

Thanks @PLL for your clarification.

so I’d like to check now whether you are happy to act as a reference for me? If not, please let me know, and I can contact YYYY to take your name of the list.... I don’t think most referees would be particularly upset by it. - As a professor, I might or might not be upset about this.  It largely depends on how well I know student (I don't know what the OP means by "visiting professors") and our previous interactions.  It also might depend on what country/system this is in.

To tack onto Kimball's comment, I'm in a similar situation to the OP. If I put any of my supervisors down they'd almost certainly be fine with me putting their names as references without telling them before hand - we meet once or twice a week, we're on good terms, plus they know I'm looking for work. I could turn up to a meeting and tell them I put them as a reference and it would almost surely be fine. The situation for someone who kind of knows me would be completely different - that's when the approach in this answer is most appropriate

@kimball As described by the asker, they were put on the spot, unaware that they needed references. They probably should have provided their supervisors name, then said, "let me send you the rest via email, as their contact info has escaped my mind momentarily," which would give them time to quickly ask. But given they were put on the spot in an interview, this is a rather understandable situation, and really the only way the ref could be upset is either (1) the ref actually has a negative opinion of the asker or (2) the ref is unreasonable.

Absolutely tell them, but in truth if they said "please don't do that" you would remove their name - so I'm going to state it as I did originally (edited for clarification) - Absolutely ask them.
When you are faced with questions such as this throughout your life, which you will be, it's good to have a foundation or base (I dare to leave morality off of this response but it does feel natural to call it a moral base but I digress) that keeps your actions in line with who you are and who you strive to be as a human being.
In this case, you are concerned about asking for one reason or another.  It appears it's not something easy for you to do and as it may never even be noticed or come up beyond this one letter there's a certain logic of "why even do something difficult if it may not matter at all".
You do it because it's the "right thing" to do and your stomach knows it. I did put "right thing" in quotes as it's often phrased as such in colloquialisms but please don't take that as a denigration, it really is the right thing to do and I'm in no way mocking that.    The stomach or gut reaction to things in life is actually extremely important and not given it's place in our decision making as the quantification of such feelings isn't established and thus we incorrectly assign it a lower value than what it does in fact represent in terms of importance, use and overall big picture frameworks for building a better society and self.
You wrote this post because it is nagging you.  If something is nagging you, address it.  It's very simple.  If what you are doing to address the nagging isn't negative, hurtful or damaging to yourself or others then the nagging must be a concern that NOT addressing it could be just those things - hurtful, negative or damaging at some point in the future.
Your concerned you may be doing something "wrong", something that goes against who you are and who you want to be in this world as a person and your writing of this post is a perfect example of that concern which isn't necessarily at the top of mind but more subconscious if you will.
Good people ask these questions and seek these answers, so my respect to you for asking and taking responses.
This may read as over assured or single minded in a way, and the single minded part can partially be supported I'm sure, but it is intended to be an open and honest response using the philosophy and method I have come to respect and try to apply in my own life - nothing more.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Is there a database of every scientist with their scientific interests?
Is there an open database of every scientist with their scientific interests? For example, I want to find a list of all scientists with their contact details based in the UK, whose scientific interests include, say, databases. I have an idea and I would like to approach some of them with it.
Edit: such database does exist, I used it almost 10 years ago for different reasons, cannot remember its website anymore :(

If you really mean every scientist regardless of country or field,  then the answer is no. If you mean every scientist in a particular subfield in a particular country, then possibly.

Not every. Half of them, even 1% would be enough.

If you have no idea who does research in the topic then your ideas need to be researched better before researchers will be likely to respond in the first place.

@TobiasKildetoft: I fully agree in the described case. Note, though, that the problem could indeed occur legitimately, such as when doing "meta-research" (research about the processes and state of research).

relatively good coverage:
https://orcid.org/orcid-search/search

I don't think this database exists, but you might try searching the literature archives. Databases like Web of Science might help you.

I too am not familiar with such a database.  If it existed, I might be loathe to appear in it.  I'm sure the very well known professors get contacted with "isn't this a great idea that would interest you" often enough already.  The more this happens, the less likely people will even look at such inquiries.

Such databases exist. They are called publication catalogues or a scientific libraries.
You are not going to get a more accurate and uniformly complete picture of what researchers are working on other than by looking at their research output. There is no detailed, standardized, and complete classification of research topics, either, and if there were one, it would quickly be moot1, as research topics are merged and new ones are created all the time. Moreover, knowing that a given researcher works on databases is not going to help you much: They might do research about the performance optimization of DB engines, or about domain-specific DB access languages, or about conveying the contents of DBs to blind users, or about the legal ramifications of possibly slanderous statements in crowd-sourced DBs ... you get the idea.
After a basic pre-selection of publications by keywords, you will have to look at each researcher and their profile individually to determine whether their research interests are actually related to your idea.
1: I am looking at you, ACM paper classification.

I don't think publication catalogs necessarily provide contact information, but one should be able to "join" that data with public info (web searches) to get the right contact info.

I agree with the previous answers that suggest publucation databases as the way to go. Additionally, you can use the advanced search of ORCiD and search for keywords but the results are only as good as the keywords which have to be entered by the researchers themselves.


text:
Whether to include a middle initial in author name on academic publications?
When a person is starting their academic career and submitting their first paper, they need to give some consideration to what their official academic name should be. Consistency across publications is an important principle. A common consideration is whether to include a middle initial in academic publications. Thus, I was interested in what general advice you would give to a PhD student or early career researcher deciding whether to include their middle initial in their author name on publications.
A few possible principles:

Always include a middle initial because it reduces the chance that your name will be the same as another academic (including cases where only initials are shown in references), or because it looks more distinguished.
Only include a middle initial if your name is common, because there is a simplicity in just having a first and last name that is desirable where possible.

So, in summary:

What general advice would you give to PhD students and early career researchers about whether to include a middle initial in their publication author name?
Would you give different advice depending on the name (e.g., John K. Smith compared to Ambrosia K. Hooperdinkel)?

Note that this is different to some related questions about (a) whether you can add a middle initial to previous publications (b) the importance of name consistency, (c) how to cite papers with inconsistent initials.

I used to just go by first and last name until I lived in Spain. All of a sudden my two names felt horribly inadequate compared to the 3-6 names (with possibly even more words!). I've used my full name — first, middle, and last, no initials — ever since.

You should use whatever name you like [provided it's professional enough].  It's your paper, and your name, and you should be proud of them both.  For me, I realized that I prefer my shortened name "Pat Devlin" instead of my given name "Patrick Devlin," so I just decided to start going by it for all my papers, and I'm happy with the choice.

I chose to use my middle initial but now have a collection of outputs with and without it. From my N=1, there'll always be those collaborators that submit something without thinking to check about middle initials.

@NajibIdrissi no doubt this is both culture specific and subjective, but I was once told by a senior colleague that having a middle initial can look more "distinguished". This colleague was fairly proper. I've reworded to "distinguished", I think that may capture the view of perhaps a minority.

@JackSt.Claire Officially I have three first names (2-4 is quite common in the Netherlands, only one is used in day-to-day life) and no middle name. I tried putting my 2nd and 3rd first name in the middle name field, but this results in my 3rd one being dropped. In that article I'm J.H. lastname instead of J.H.A. lastname and I feel incomplete.

It's a matter of author's own preferences whether to include the middle initial or not. It's better to be consistent from the beginning, and do not use different styles in different papers, although the author might be able to "glue" together their records in some bibliographical services if they treat different spellings of their name as different persons (I have managed to do this on Scopus for myself, but there may be other databases which I don't know).
This, however, does not solve the main problem - it only reduces the chance that two authors will have the same name or initials, but it does not eliminate it completely. This is why authors are advised to establish ORCID:
Quoting http://orcid.org/, this is "a persistent digital identifier that distinguishes you from every other researcher and, through integration in key research workflows such as manuscript and grant submission, supports automated linkages between you and your professional activities ensuring that your work is recognized".
Some publishers already allow the author to specify their ORCID during submission, and some others already require it, for example PLOS One and the Royal Society.
Another useful feature of ORCID is that it allows the author to keep a public profile with a list of their publications (and other optional details). Even more, one could link their ORCID profile to Impactstory (https://impactstory.org/) and track online impact of their research. As an example, by now I've already stopped maintaining a list of publications on my personal homepage since I can just put there links to several databases, ORCID being one of them, and most of them (as reported by Impactstory) are in open access anyway.

I wouldn't recommend dropping the publication list on one's homepage. Its main benefit is that you can add free pdf files for everyone to download (while typically Orcid and the other scholarly databases can't, because of licensing issues).

@FedericoPoloni yes, this is just an example which works for me, not a recommendation. I've made an edit to explain why. By the way ORCID does not store items itself - it keeps only metainformation, including links to their original location.


text:
How do I start publishing when my job is not research related?
I finished my masters thesis (computer science) a year ago and had only a slight chance to become a graduate student (I declined the offer because it was too risky for me).
Now I am working as a software engineer for almost a year. I still want to do a PhD and I am convinced I can do it one day. I even told my company that I want to do a PhD and if there exists a chance to do it in cooperation with the company, I will do it.
Nevertheless, I find myself reading books about the life of a PhD student, how to write a dissertation and so on...but I feel like I am getting nowhere closer to my goal. I would like to publish something that I can show to research institutes of interest (something to add to my CV that is research related).
Right now I am interested in Software Architecture, I also read other publications even if they are not related to my current job as a software engineer. I feel like I could squeeze some of my knowledge into some kind of publication, I just don't know how to do it.
Could you give me any hints or even books that focus on publication for the field of computer science?
All the books I read so far are either medicine research related or very global...

To be honest, I think it would be extremely difficult to publish independently, in a forum that would matter.  That is, there are predatory publications that will take just about anything, including a publication consisting solely of the repeated sentence Get me off Your F--king Mailing List ... but if you want to publish real work, there are a lot of hurdles.
I'm not going to google for you to point at how-to's that must say things like how you need to state a thesis, provide background, do some evaluation, compare to prior art, and so on.  I don't think the issue is the mechanics of writing a paper, though the English in your original post indicate that will be a problem if you publish in English.  (I sympathize with those for whom it is not their first language, but it doesn't make it easier to publish.)
The issue is really, as a junior software engineer, is it really true that you can could squeeze some of [your] knowledge into some kind of publication?
It's surely the case that some people have published with minimal background and sometimes even made monumental contributions.  But the bar goes up with time.  There's a lot of cumulative work.  If you really think you can add to that, you probably should start with the "prior art" part I mentioned before.  Read a bunch of papers, for instance in a conference pertaining to your area of interest, and see if there is something there where you think you can add on to it.
But I think a better approach is to do accomplished work as a software engineer, then apply to a PhD program, and have the professors teach you what is involved in publishing.

I am very grateful for your honest answer.
I had a job interview for a job as researcher (before my sw engineer job) where they asked me why I didnt publicate anything. They stated that I could use my bachelor or master thesis and publish a portion out of it. One of them said that I should not be afraid to write something down and publicate, I should just do it. Nevertheless I have no idea how to do those things. Get a latex template from a journal and just start writing something down? I don't know.

I responded to another answer but the comment applies here too: I agree that it might be possible to publish work from the master's degree, but if so,isn't it likely the the professor would have pushed for it at the time? But that is certainly an avenue to pursue.

I'll offer a different answer to the above, as I'm in a very similar position to you.
I don't think publishing 'independently' it is necessarily as hard as people assume, if you have some university education behind you. I put independently in quotation marks, because I think your best avenue would be to reach out to somebody at the university where you completed your master's, eg getting into contact with your thesis supervisor, and see if your thesis is worth condensing into something of publishable quality.
An alternative would be to approach other professors at the university, if you have other connections from your masters. This is what I did, although I had already done the research myself, and mostly needed the guidance on how to best write up the paper. It's also really helpful when writing papers to have someone much smarter than you to bounce your ideas off. They will also know the field you're wanting to publish in, and can help you select a suitable conference, etc.
If you get in touch with any members of staff, they will probably expect you to have a specific research problem in mind. As someone who isn't a PhD student, you and the person you choose to work with won't have the implicit professional relationship, and so it may seem a little bizarre if you contact them with a view to publish just something, rather than approaching them to talk specifically about a research interest.

I agree that it might be possible to publish work from the master's degree, but if so,isn't it likely the the professor would have pushed for it at the time?

@FredDouglis not necessarily. It could be a non-trivial amount of work to take a thesis to a publishable paper, and the professor mightn't have even considered it. By the time theses are submitted/read (in the UK at least?) the 'student' will have practically graduated, won't be officially associated with the school anymore (no access to buildings), and mightn't want to put any effort into research-related work on top of their job.

Regardless of whether or not you decide to pursue a Ph.D, publishing is in principle not something you set out to do in advance, this is always going to be the result of research work that has results that the scientific community is likely going to be interested in. This means that you need to do a lot of literature research first to understand what the problems the researchers are dealing with today are. If you then do your own research and come up with results that you think the professionals would want to read about, then you can consider writing up an article.
So, while there are always going to be exceptions, in principle a publication by you on some topic means that you've mastered that topic to such a degree that you should be considered to be a top expert (at least when one narrows things down to what's covered in your article). This is the very reason why a publication can help increase your chances to get an academic job.
You should not reverse the logic here and try to get to a publication for the sake if it. There are junk journals where you can get away with publishing mediocre work that editors of normal journals would have rejected. But publishing in such journals won't help you much, most researchers will get a visceral reaction when they see the title of such a journal on your list of publications.
Publishing as an independent researcher is possible, I've published quite  few articles outside of my professional research area. But it helps to have had research experience in one field to be able to do this. I'm quite sure that I could not have written up a proper research article had I not had studied at research level at university.


text:
How can you handle your professor not doing his job (as a postdoc)?
For the past two years, I have been working as a postdoc under a new German professor with what I consider to be an atrocious work ethic:

His presence on campus is limited only to when in-person teaching is involved. The rest of the time he stays at home hundreds of kilometers away.
He is disorganized, often misses to register grades for students, or respond to their emails (I know this because they contact me instead with "what is happening here?").
Zero research initiative. He relies on other people to put his name in papers.
No support for his PhD students; he has had one since 2016 who is supposed to defend this summer, with two workshop papers since 2018, and I have met her and she is not the problem (the field is computer science).
He is constantly delaying procedures that just need to be signed-off by him, like reimbursements for travels (I've waited for mine for over four months for something that is done in two weeks tops).

Suffice to say, I have worked in universities in four other European countries and Australia, and I have always been the lazier one.
So, I walked to the dean's office and I asked him what the point is of someone having a job that he can't do. He told me that my attitude is not nice, and that this is normal in German universities as they “don’t follow the US model” (whatever that means).
Two months ago, I got a call by the president. He told me that I what I describe is indeed not professional behavior, but nothing really happened after that. In fact, I still see students looking for him and not finding him, missing grades, and so on.
I don’t really know what my options are. The dean basically suggested me to shut up and just do my own work as if I am independent here (I don’t have to involve the professor), but I think that this is nonsense, as I’m not a slave to ignore what is going on in my environment.
I would resign, but I like the city here, and why should I resign anyway for someone else?
Let me know your thoughts, please. Perhaps I have been extremely lucky so far to have worked with dozens of different professors/researchers that had some baseline qualities and work ethic and now I am acting paranoid?

You don't describe that it really affects you or your work in any way.

A minor thing: with two workshop papers since 2018 – Is this good or bad? (This really depends on the subfield.)

Who is "the president" in this context? It's not a typical position at most academic institutions I've worked it.

@penelope here in Germany this person has the title "President of the University", in German "Präsident der Universität". As far as I know, he has the final say in many things, because I have seen his signature in some of my documents.

"why should I resign anyway for someone else?" - because if things don't change you'll be stuck working in a situation that causes you grief. You have to weigh the +'ves and -'ves and determine if it's worth it to stay. Also: you don't get to change every environment to what is best for you. Be aware that some things are out of your control, and you need to either adapt to that environment or seek a new one. Eventually you may be the decision-maker that can enforce your will, but you aren't right now. Do what you can if you think it'd be better, but if nothing changes you may need to move on.

@Wrzlprmft I just saw this, but 2 workshop papers for a PhD in Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence in particular is almost zero. And, again, this is not to discredit the student, she has been working hard and is capable, but if you are not getting feedback or support from your supervisor, you can get a record like that quite easily.

@Chim3ra I know someone in the same field who got his PhD with one short paper under the supervision of a senior professor internationally ranked in the top 50. Publishing papers is not a condition (surely highly recommended to validate the PhD work) to obtain a PhD (unless explicitly mentioned in the PhD regulation of the faculty). Since you are not a professor and I assume not habilitated -which means not allowed to supervise PhD theses-, how you can judge the assessment of several professors (supervisor, examiners, PhD committee)???

@Younes I don't understand, in general in a PhD defense anyone with a PhD degree can ask questions and/or make a remark. It is not about supervising a PhD, it is about making a judgement on another PhD, which anyone with a PhD degree has the gravitas to make.

@Chim3ra I strongly disagree. In my university (Germany) for example, only PhDs with habilitation are allowed to ask questions during the defense. I presume it is the case in most german universities. Second, it is not about judging the thesis but about judging the judges.

Given the inactivity in research you describe, I wonder why you choose to do a postdoc with that person to start with.

If this doesn't affect your work, I suggest, like the president, to let it go and finish your projects so that you can move on. It is their problem to resolve, not yours.
Pressing it too hard can negatively affect your own future if someone in the system is vindictive, say that professor or the chair.
You will find a lot of unfortunate things in academia that you have no real power to correct, especially as a junior person.
If you want to do something positive, and have the time and energy, do what you can to benefit the students that you see affected.

Well, it DOES affect my work to some extent, my motivation mostly, because it makes me feel like a slave here. I have worked for many different Professors in the past, and they always seemed professional, and always showed up, so I was feeling grateful and I was trying to give back as much as I could and involved them in my papers with pleasure.

@Chim3ra    “it makes me feel like a slave here”: welcome to this part of the postdoc world.

@ZeroTheHero well, it shouldn't be this way, and if nobody does sth about it, nth will ever be done. Postdocs are already bad employment as they are, Profs shouldn't create more problems by bottle-necking procedures. In another comment of mine I said that I will leave for a tenure-track abroad and will use the rest of my time here to take this to the Ministry level.

What you can do for others
Professors in Germany (and other countries) are very difficult to fire. Most failed professors end up without a group, or one or two employees that are come with their professorship instead of third-party funding. They are like a permanent teaching staff with somewhat higher salary.
Complaining to the department, faculty, or similar is not bad, but only if such complaints accumulate can you expect for something to happen, though even then I would not expect too much. Unless you can motivate others to complain too, you probably did all you can do in this respect.
You can also warn people considering to join the group (if such people exist) about what to expect. If required, you can thinly veil this, e.g.: “In this group, you have much freedom to decide the direction of your research, but are also expected to work very independently.”
What you can do for others and yourself
If you have the capacity, use this situation to gather experience and CV points by taking the role of your professor where he is failing, for example:

Advise other supervisees of your professor in research and writing and earn authorships as well as some supervision experience.
Publish your papers without your supervisor as a co-author showing that you can do research independently.
Establish collaborations as you seem fit.
Take higher responsibilities in teaching and thus gain experience with organising courses etc.
(Basically what your dean suggested:) Organise your own time and explore your own research ideas.

Ideally, when you are interviewing for a higher-ranking position, you can honestly say that you have experience with these things.
What I wouldn’t do is to get involved in any grant applications as they mostly enable your supervisor to harm more advisees in the future.
General caveat
Many of the above suggestions can obviously backfire when your professor feels attacked and can muster the energy for revenge. It is up to you to judge how likely this is and how much you prioritise security over doing good and a chance to benefit from the situation. On the other hand, an escalation after a serious backfire may be what eventually brings down your professor (in the sense that he cannot find students, supervisees, or funding anymore).

In this group, you have much freedom to decide the direction of your research, but are also expected to work very independently - I know things are more understated in Europe compared to the US, but even so, if someone said this to me, it would never even occur to me that there was a "thinly-veiled" message here. Would most Germans pick up on this?

@cag51: Actually, criticism is usually much more understated in the US and direct in Germany. Still, I think a lot depends on the tone here though. If you are saying this seriously in a “you really need to know this” context, I think most people will get that this is not normal. And even if not, the plaintext message already is something that may be a red flag for some people. (Mind that I personally hardly ever do subtext and would probably be very direct in this situation, but that really depends on what risk you wish to take. )

@cag51 As an Englishman the ''very'' in front of ''independently'' is something I would pick up on as a vague warning that they are basically going to provide zero support or assistance.

This is a great answer, and indeed I have been doing most of the things you mention! I have organized my own course earlier in the year, I have worked with a BSc student and produced a conference publication and even submitted our work to a journal, I supervise 2 MSc students currently, I collaborate with people abroad, some have even visited me here. My main issue is, I cannot really apply for national/international grants without the support of a Professor (in theory, I can apply for national grants, but I will be competing against Professors and big labs).

@Chim3ra: Do you really want to apply for a grant to be “used” at your current location or rather somewhere else? In the latter case, the default (at least in my academic vicinity) is that the hosting institution would help you. Also note that many grants are aimed at postdocs in particular or evaluation for first-time applicants is special (e.g., for typical DFG grants). Of course, it may still be difficult to obtain a grant without mentoring.

@Wrzlprmft Well, the rest of the current location here is nice, I have lunch and chats with other Profs, and the city is nice too, so at least I wanted to give it a try. Some months ago I also entered the Habilitation phase here exactly because I wanted to maximize my efforts here and actually do some things (teach, supervise, apply for grants, etc).

@Chim3ra: In that case, I would confidentially consult some of the other professors on your situation. This depends a lot on the local power structures, how much support your professor has, and particularly how much support you can get from somebody else. Depending on these things are, you can suffer from depending on your professor for quite a while or not at all.

@Wrzlprmft I can tell you this: the prof was a non-tenure track junior prof here before getting tenure, despite a poor research record (worse than mine actually, but I don't want to judge performance solely by 1 metric) and some complaints about teaching. Soon after I started here, he was told to find a professorship in some other German university too, so he made some applications, which didn't go through. So, there seems to be some support, but also profs who don't like him. The previous Dean would also not refer to him as a Prof, but as a Mr, and Germans are very formal with using titles.

Regarding "professors are hard to fire", it should be noted that the only real duty (which can be enforced, and not doing it can lead to firing) is teaching a certain amount of hours. Everything else is, on a formal level, optional, and cannot be a reason to fire a professor.

@user151413: Everything else is, on a formal level, optional – Do you really mean formal here? I am pretty sure that formally there are other duties, but they are not practically enforceable, e.g., since failed research is difficult to distinguish from no research. Also, most professors in Germany are “verbeamtet” (a type of public servant), a status which you can only lose under grave circumstances.

It seems that I somewhat answered my own question by earning a 6-year tenure track at another University abroad :D However, I do plan to book a meeting with the Bavarian State Ministry for Science and Art here, as my current University falls under their jurisdiction and I have documented all the things that I mentioned here. From the University side, many people are friends with one another so nobody would be willing to "distort the balance".

@Wrzlprmft See e.g. https://www.gesetze-bayern.de/Content/Document/BayHSchPG-9. The duties ("Dienstaufgaben") are in teaching and administration, not research. Note that refusing to do your job is a grave circumstance: A professor who refuses to teach can lose their job.

@user151413: The very first half sentence of said law is: “Professoren und Professorinnen nehmen […] Aufgaben in Wissenschaft, […], Forschung, […] nach näherer Ausgestaltung ihres Dienstverhältnisses selbstständig wahr;” – So it depends on the specific professor’s contract, but it is reasonable to assume that research is included.

@Wrzlprmft Yes and no - note that the subsequent list of duties does not talk about teaching. Of course, the list is not exhaustive, but rather gives specific instances of those duties, but it is noteworthy that research is not listed. If it would be considered a general formal duty of professors, it would be listed there. Also, note that professors (as long as they are Beamte) don't have a working contract.

In Germany (like in many other countries), professors are civil servants and it isn't easy to fire them. Therefore, all your efforts to report this behaviour won't probably have any effects.
However, even if they do not have this privilege, I don't see reporting to the dean or the president is the right action. First, it is not your task unless you are directly affected (and here, you complain only about your conflict with him by following the right procedure). Second, it opens the door to many malicious complaints. Third, if the professor decides to complete only his basic duties (according to his contract that I am pretty sure you don't have access to), he is free and no one can complain about it.
As a postdoc, it is recommended to stay professional and not bad-mouth your professor because you don't have the competency to judge him. It is your right not to like working with him and you can simply resign. You mentioned you do not want to do it because you like the city. Are you expecting the professor to be fired and you keep your position because you like the city?
EDIT

he has had one since 2016 who is supposed to defend this summer, with two workshop papers since 2018

Since you are not a professor and I assume not habilitated, you are not allowed to supervise PhD students. How can you assess whether the students deserve the degree or not and judge the assessment of many professors (i.e. Supervisor, the examiners and the members of the PhD committee)???

what I consider to be an atrocious work ethic

Nothing you mentioned has to do with work ethics. I would rather call it "irresponsibility".

The phrase "work ethic" does not really refer to ethics.   It's an add phrase, that one.

Since you've already brought this to the attention of several others, you no longer have to deal with this in secrecy.
So, take the time to conduct 1-on-1 chats with other people who are affected by his behavior - other post-docs and PhD candidates, and possibly junior tenure-trackers. Also talk to the relevant people in the student union.
After those 1-on-1 chats, try to schedule a meeting of several of these people. In that meeting, each person should present two or three cases of "not doing the job" misconduct on that Professor's part. Summarize the meeting in a joint letter to be signed by participants, calling for action to be taken to address the situation - but without demanding specific measures (e.g. don't say "fire him").
Before sending this out, see if someone closer to him can get a draft of that letter in front of his face, so that he has a chance of offer making amends (although he might just lash out at those involved).
Finally, have different people, not just yourself, mail this letter to:

The head of the department
The department council or body of senior academic staff
The student union
The graduate employee union if you have one
The senior academic staff union
The Professor himself

... and post a few copies on the bulletin boards where your research group is at.
An additional measure you could consider - if the university is mulling the affair and claiming they can't do anything - is indicating this may be brought to the attention of donors and funding bodies.
Of course, as I've already hinted - the more of these things you do personally, the more this is likely to gain you the reputation of a trouble-maker, or get that Professor to bad-mouth you to colleagues, or terminate your post-doc early etc. Doing the right thing rarely goes unpunished.

This is Germany where the professor is a civil servant (as pointed out elsewhere). The primary funding body will be the government. In this context, what you suggest is completely absurd. But even in other situations, you are essentially recommending a full-time job "to get back at the professor." I realize the U.S. is all about open letters of aggrieved and offended parties, but I don't think this is helpful to OP and their career.