The boss changed the second author to a joint work, which has no effect on me

It has an impact and will affect the rights and interests such as the authorship of the article.

The first author, who has made the greatest contribution to innovative scientific research achievements, is the main body of the completion of the article, and at the same time, it brings the most chain effects and effects, and should be clear to the corresponding author.

Clause. 2. The relationship between authors and the issue of authorship.

Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China.

Article 10(2) of the State of the People's Republic of China stipulates that the right of authorship is the right to indicate the identity of the author and sign the work. The first right of authorship refers to the right of the author to mark his name on the work he created and his reproduction, also known as the right to indicate his name.

In the works of several people, the arrangement of the authors' names is determined by the authors through consultation. The difference in the ranking order of the authors often has a great impact on the authors.

In general, top-ranked authors tend to be highly rated by people. If there is a unit in the assessment of professional titles.

For collaborative works, only the authors who rank first are recognized as the results of their works can be used to participate in the evaluation of the title.

Co-first authors are more common in foreign journals, especially in more authoritative journals, and the co-first author is often a treatise with multiple authors from different scientific research units and wide information coverage. From the perspective of respecting scientists, the original intention of establishing a co-first author is good, it is necessary for a part of the **, and it is an affirmation of the labor of the main participants in the research Multiple co-first authors inevitably bring about the abuse of academic honor, deviate from the principle of authenticity of scientific research results, and bring potential academic ethics problems and even copyright disputes. When there is a contradiction between authorship, which may be exaggerated, and scientific authenticity, scientific authenticity and rigor need to be maintained.

There is no need to delay it, from the enjoyment of rights, the inventors are all the same, the only difference may be to ask the first inventor by virtue of the title of the splitting model, but the second inventor can rarely use it.

How to say this, it is generally only of great use to the first author. Some things in the future also need to depend on how your unit stipulates them, and it will be beneficial to you to write yours anyway.

Generally, it is only of great use to the first author, and the usefulness of the second author depends on the unit, but it is far better than not writing. You still have a month to graduate, and I suggest you plan for yourself as well, you know, it's not that easy to get a core. In addition, you can contact me if you need to post.

OK. Specifically, in the first author and the second author, you make your own decision, some mentors don't like to be the second author, think about it yourself, don't sign the name of the mentor in order to express your respect for the mentor, the tutor is unhappy because the second author is unhappy, it will be counterproductive. I wish you success!

Different schools have different requirements related to the school assessment criteria. As for your concerns, I haven't heard of any schools doing this. In my school, the school is the first.

The first and second authors are the same credit, this is because usually the student is the first author, and the second author must write his own tutor, such as 150 points for a CSCD core, 80 points for CSCD extension, 20 points for ordinary dual-core, and so on. I don't understand why your ** second author doesn't write about his own mentor?

Strictly speaking, it is indeed infringing, because many evaluation requirements are measured by the first author.

If you are able to contact the publication for correction, there will be no further problems.

Her request for the return of her publication fee was unfounded, as the article had already been published and the assumption of the publication fee was contractual, albeit oral, contractual.

It doesn't matter, it's just that some units will require it to be done independently**, so that there can't be a second author, and if there is no request, then there is no problem.

Publication ** is issued by the first author, preferably with the first author.

Of course, there should be a difference between independence and cooperation.

Affirmative impact.

Affect the right of authorship.

Affect copyright income.

Nonsense, of course, has an impact. What's your situation? Was it published in two journals, or did it vote for a few meetings and pay for one?

How many publications can be searched online? The first author had the most influence, but it didn't matter if no one found out. The key is to see if anyone wants to you, or your boss.

How can you do such a thing?

It's nothing, as long as the data is not exactly the same, it's fine, you have a lot of situations like this, and many people do the same.