In his opening editorial, he says some things I like to hear. Here's a snippet:
I've always greatly admired the scientific ethos of the Journal of Neurophysiology. Reading the Journal reminds me of what I like best about science. I like that it publishes full-length reports, which are still being cited 20 or 30 years on. I like that each paper can stand on its own, without 10 supplemental online figures...I like that the Journal of Neurophysiology has been guided solely by publishing excellent and interesting science, regardless of perceived "sexiness" or "impact factor."Hoo-ray! I like the sentiments, that's easy to see. Turns out Linden is actually a pretty funny guy, who has a blog, The Accidental Blog, where I found a link to a podcast of neuroscientists, Neuroscientists Talk Shop. Sounds interesting, and it's getting loaded onto the MP3 player as we speak. Yay, more geek talk!
Course, I haven't published in J. Neurophys. But it's always been on my watch list.
4 comments:
I was hoping one of you bloggers would pick up on Linden's comments...it reminded me of a few discussions floating around about reviewers asking for many more experiments than are actually needed (maybe he reads the blogs!)
I love JNeurophys--It's great for solid ephys papers
That's another good section in the editorial, about how reviewers should justify any requests for new experiments. I wouldn't be surprised if he reads some blogs, as he's got one!
I definitely like J Neurophys a lot; lots of good electrophysiology as you say. I did find it interesting that Linden essentially admitted that the molecular papers they have published are not at the same level of quality.
Thanks for picking this up! great editorial!
It was certainly interesting for me to read that blog. Thanx for it. I like such topics and everything that is connected to this matter. I would like to read more on that blog soon.
Post a Comment