The fact that to a seasoned programmer the work is easy doesn't have anything to do with it. As you describe it, this is work that's required for the publication. Without it, you don't have a paper. With it, you do. Therefore the programmer contributed significantly (critically) to the paper, and therefore the programmer should be an author.

The fact that it's quick and easy for a programmer simply means that programmers have spent significant time and effort learning skills that you don't have. If you consider the work trivial, then go out and learn the skills yourself, and do the work yourself. If that's too much work, then put an appropriate value on that work and offer authorship.

An example in my field is histopathology. I can take tissue slides to an expert who will look at them for five minutes and provide an interpretation. That expert becomes a co-author, not because of their five minutes of work but because of the decades of experience behind it.

Collaborators shouldn't need to run a bloody gauntlet and engage in hand-to-hand combat to become co-authors. If they provide a skill that contributes significantly to the paper, that should be enough.

Seasoned's programmer's rate would probably be $100-$1000 per day. This, assuming that your estimation is correct (dangerous assumption) means you are asking for a volunteer to provide you with $500-$5000 of free labor(assuming that the work takes 5 days).

I also find it strange that you mention time for a seasoned's programmer, but want to hire an undergrad - the difference in the time required to finish the job might differ much. And no work is "Trivial" if it requires "few days" of expert's work.

Undergrad's work might also be of lower quality because of his lack of experience - what if the program is faulty and returns wrong results? How would you know that?

Ultimately it comes down to how you arrange it - you might find someone willing to do it for free. I suggest considering potential gains (is undergrad contributing $2000 in his time not enough to become a co-author?) and threats ( what if the work takes much longer? what if the program has bugs? what if the undergrad can't do it? ).

Would it be ethically wrong to recruit an undergrad for a few days volunteer work without pay

"Ethically wrong"? Some answers say it isn't (though I disagree)

But that is the wrong question to ask

However, I feel [that] to get some backing on the theory, I need... computer data.

• You've worked on a problem for two years.


• You're going to trust "a couple days" free work from a random undergrad to prove it?

If you don't know enough to code it yourself, how do you know the code is right?

In other words (and this isn't meant as harsh or flippant) if you can't tell me how you will be able to tell the difference between these two outcomes:

1. A person taking your assignment and coding something which produces the answer you expect


2. A person writing a program which will prove or disprove your theory

...then you don't need the code, do you?

If it turns out you think #2 is correct, but later someone proves that #1 is what really happened... that's bad.

This is only for time reasons as I am not familiar with tools required. Everything will be given as cook book to the interested programmer.

This information was added after I wrote my answer. I answered with the assumption that OP was getting an undergrad to do the code because s/he lacked the knowledge.

I don't suppose it's unethical so long as you are clear in your expectations and proposed reward (which is effectively nothing), and the other party fully understands what they are getting into. This could easily become exploitative, however, as you are hoping to get someone to work for you while offering really nothing of value in return. If you are a professor or are some other type of authority figure over the student, I'd tread very carefully here, as you could be exerting undue influence over this person.

I notice that you plan to approach an undergraduate student about this, which could very easily be seen as preying on someone who doesn't know any better. If you have a really interesting problem that's so cool to work on that someone should be happy to do it for a simple "thank you", why not approach a true "seasoned programmer" instead of an undergraduate student? If true professionals find your proposal unpalatable, I'd say it would be unethical to try to hoodwink a less experienced person into the deal.

Would it be ethically wrong to recruit an undergrad for a few days volunteer work without pay to get the computer crunching part done and not mention him as a coauthor and only mention as acknowledgement?

Yes. Perhaps it wouldn’t be the most terrible ethical offense, but if forced to choose one of the two words “no” or “yes” to answer the question “would it be ethically wrong?”, I’d go with “yes”.

The reason why it’s wrong is that you are going against established conventions of what authorship means. You think that by offering a student some other sort of reward for doing part of the work involved in publishing a paper, whether it be an acknowledgement, a letter of recommendation, or the opportunity to add another experience to their CV, then it is okay to not list them as a coauthor. But this is wrong, for two reasons: first, there is a clear power differential at play here that makes it likely the student may be tempted to go along with your scheme even without really finding the arrangement very fair or agreeable. In other words, it’s exploitation and an abuse of authority (of a sort we hear about all too often on this site unfortunately).

Second, and perhaps even more importantly, it is not just the student you are offending against. The scientific community has an expectation to be given honest and accurate information about who contributed meaningfully to the creation of the paper. And, by current conventions at least, “several days of work by a seasoned programmer” is more than enough to be counted as a coauthor. I find the idea of you reaching a private agreement with the student to deprive the community of that information by having the student give up authorship rights quite problematic, even overlooking the separate issue of exploitation. Imagine for example if rich people started paying famous academics to collaborate on research with them, giving them a high salary with the agreement that the famous and super-talented person will give up their coauthorship rights. Is this just a private transaction between two consenting adults that doesn’t hurt anyone else? No, of course it’s much less innocent and is harmful, since it deprives the community of information it needs to function effectively, and goes against agreed-upon norms of what’s acceptable.

Now, of course, in your situation you are actually the person who will have done almost all the research, and that’s fine. The student being a coauthor doesn’t mean that they will get half the credit for something you worked on for two years. It would be completely legitimate for you to make it clear to people what each coauthor contributed in any way necessary (by writing it in the paper, or in your CV or publication list, research statement etc). You absolutely deserve to get the correct portion of credit, and there is an honest way to make that happen. But as for coauthorship, the student programmer should get it, since they will have contributed time, creative thinking and a technical skill that’s quite nontrivial (at least, nontrivial enough that you yourself don’t possess it) to the project, and those are the accepted criteria for being a coauthor.

It would be exploitative and quite unethical, yes.

It is only a few days work of programming.

You'll know that after the programming is done. Preliminary estimates of programming time are typically much lower than actual effort expended, not to mention the significant amount of not-actual-programming overhead we tend not to account for.

Would it be ethically wrong to recruit an undergrad for a few days volunteer work without pay

So, you want someone to do work you need for your research - for which you yourself are paid, and for which your university is funded - without the person doing the work getting paid?

You bet this is ethically wrong. Ethically, morally, and in some countries also legally.

It should also be noted you would not just mistreating that student. You would be:

• Legitimizing younger, inexperienced researchers not getting acknowledged for their work.


• Legitimizing students not getting acknowledged for their material contribution to the work of people higher-up the ladder.


• Legitimizing exploitative employment practices in academia, where it is unfortunately quite common to squeeze unpaid work out of people who depend on the system in various ways.

So your suggested act would be offensive both to the academic community at large. If I were in your university you could expect harsh action from the nontenured academic staff union upon us finding out you've done this.

to get some backing on the theory I need some quantitative hard computer data... and not mention him as a coauthor and only mention as acknowledgement?

Since this data is necessary objectively, it will also be necessary to present it, to some extent, in the paper. And this necessary part of the paper will be generated by that undergrad programmer. ... Sounds like a co-author to me; and you cannot drop co-authors.

Also, while it is sometimes legitimate to ask people about whether they want authorship or not - when an undergraduate is involved, there's a power and knowledge imbalance which makes it unethical to ask them to give up co-authorship.

What you could do - if you like - is describe the extent of his/her involvement; but even this may be impolite (depending on the conventions in your field of research).

This is only for time reasons as I am not familiar with tools required.

So the co-author will even utilize some expertise which you do not have? An even stronger co-authorship.

If not for time reasons, I would have written most papers in most scientific fields all on my own. I just need enough time to become familiar with all of that stuff.

Everything will be given as cook book to the interested programmer.

That would be nice and a good idea regardless of who writes the code. However, an unethical, immoral, and exploitative act is not excused by a related socially-beneficial and commendable act.

Oh, and, just so you know - implementing something to just work for a paper and implementing it for publication so that other people can use it to is a significant difference in the amount of work necessary.

_{I also very much agree with @DanRomik's observation that you would be committing an offense against the scientific community, not just the undergrad; and with @JChrisCompton's observation that you're ignoring the issue of verification/trustworthiness of the code.}

Authorship

(Ethical) academic authorship is independent of other forms of rewards, so it doesn’t really matter here whether you pay somebody or not. The crucial aspect here is whether your programmer made a creative contribution. Now, what is creative is somewhat fuzzy and difficult to assess, but a good litmus test can be obtained from considering what a non-creative contribution would look like:

• It always produces the same result with respect to your research question. (Irrelevant or unavoidable differences like the programming language, statistical fluctuations, etc. are excluded.)


• It follows a clear established protocol.


• Understanding your research question yields no advantage to the contributor, e.g., in form of assessing the plausibility of results (also see J. Chris Compton’s answer).

If this applies to the contribution you seek, then it is likely not creative. However, as others noted, this is very likely not the case here.

Payment

Your programmer is very likely not helping you for purely altruistic reasons, so there must be something else you have to offer.
I can only see the following options:

• Scientific credit (authorship). This requires a scientific contribution, which you excluded to be the case.


• Formal payment. You also excluded this.


• A prospect of recommendation letter, good grades, thesis projects would imply an abuse of power and in some cases bribery. This could very well be compared to just receiving money from the student.


• Getting insight into the scientific process would be in conflict with your claim that this is a trivial task.

Sidenote

I often found that tackling a research question from another point of view yielded valuable new insights or perspectives in unexpected ways. Given that you spent two years on your question, investing two days in programming will almost certainly be a worthwhile experience on average.

I don't think is unethical if you provide something of value of exchange to the prospective student. Will he gain an understanding of some theory that he/she's interested in as part of the engagement? Be upfront at what you're offering to your prospective collaborator.

If you just want a free coder then yes this is unethical. This is pure and simple exploitation, and abuse of power from your side. Would you like to be on the other side of this exchange?

ps. Check the regulations of your institution!

Is the output of the computer program going to be included in the paper? If so, that output has an author, and that author deserves credit. But who is the author? Is it the computer? Is it the program? Or is it the programmer? I think it's the programmer.

If the output has no intellectual merit, why does it add value to the paper? Would including the program input instead of the output serve the reader equally?

Contrary to popular belief, programming is intellectual activity. It deserves respect.

I am a software engineer. There's a story that has always resonated with me whenever a friend asks for "free" software development

The story goes that Picasso was sitting in a Paris café when an
admirer approached and asked if he would do a quick sketch on a paper
napkin. Picasso politely agreed, swiftly executed the work, and handed
back the napkin — but not before asking for a rather significant
amount of money. The admirer was shocked: “How can you ask for so
much? It took you a minute to draw this!” “No”, Picasso replied, “It
took me 40 years”

Even though I am no Picasso in the software world, the overall message is the same and applies to any professional. A good story to consider when asking for "free" help

Blog Link to story

In many institutions, it is common for undergraduates to help with research, either paid or for credits. It is not necessarily unethical to post your project and ask for help, but you have to consider what the student is getting from this experience.

Authorship might reasonably be off the table, but at the same time the undergraduate might come with some interesting insights/get more involved. You never know.

Regardless of the authorship or financial aspect, there is some form of payment that, for some, is invaluable: the experience and the advice. For most undergraduates, getting involved in research (especially if they are actively interested in pursuing such a career) can be tough.

However, you should consider that undergrad less as the one doing the dirty work and more as your mentee. You are, after all, more experienced than him, and you could provide some useful insights into academia or into your field. This comes of course at the cost of you spending some (possibly rather fun) time with the undergraduate, sharing your knowledge.

To put is shortly, if you find somebody willing to be just a coding monkey, it's not necessarily unethical, but adopting the coding monkey as a (possibly very short term) tutee is a win-win situation.

Would it be ethically wrong to recruit an undergrad for a few days
volunteer work without pay to get the computer crunching part done and
not mention him as a coauthor and only mention as acknowledgement?

It's not ethically wrong if the engineering contribution is too tiny, compared to the whole contribution of the paper.

In fact, it's very common that professors/researchers hire several undergrads/interns to work on engineering a tool, and only list them in the acknowledgment. (I can provide many examples).

However, it is ethically wrong if the engineering contribution is substantial, and you don't list them as co-author. Whether there contribution is enough for co-authorship depends on your judgement, but your judgement can be wrong.

If you read the book "7 habits of highly effective people", one of the habit is always thinking about win-win solution. You can't just expect somebody to work for you for free. It sounds unrealistic.