Nature Genetics | Free Association

Merchandise 7X and other secrets

This is a bit behind the curve, but I can’t help commenting on an interesting confrontation my Nature News colleague Jim Giles seems to have had at last year’s meeting of the Society for Neuroscience (see Day 2: Rejected by Science). Here’s the best part:

This afternoon I wandered down to a session on how to get published in Science. As I mentioned yesterday, this went head-to-head with an equivalent session run by Nature and I wanted, out of curiosity and a healthy dose of journal rivalry, to see which would attract the most researchers.

I checked numbers first at Nature—around 170 people—and strolled down the corridor to Science. They had the edge, I thought, since they were serving post-session drinks. I had just started my head count when up strolled a rather formidable looking lady with a Science badge on.

Her: You’re from the competition. I think you should leave.

Me: Erm…really?

Her: Yes. It’s not fair that a Nature editor attends this talk.

Me: But I’m not an editor, I’m a journalist.

Her: A journalist? So you want to get published in Science?

Me: Erm…no…actually I’m just curious.

Her: Well I think you should leave.

Nothing like a little intrigue at the SfN, huh? Well, if you’re wondering why it should be easier to get into one of George Bush’s press conferences than to attend a public talk by an editor for a science journal, the answer is: it shouldn’t. Most professional editors at journals like Nature, Science, Cell etc. give talks on editorial policy and how best to navigate the peer review process. While it’s conceivable that such a talk would indicate an editorial interest in particular subject matter that would be surprising, it’s not likely, and the easiest way to get published in such a journal is rather obvious, as pointed out by my colleague Annette Markus.

These talks are generally useful in dispelling some of the mystery surrounding what editors do. Who reads the submissions? How do you decide which manuscripts are sent out for formal review? How do you choose referees? What’s the best way to revise a paper when some of the referees’ comments seem off base?

We’ll be addressing some of these questions at Free Association in coming weeks, but if an editor comes to town to give a talk in the meantime, by all means stop by. I’m sure you’ll find it interesting, even if the formula for the world’s most famous soft drink remains a secret.

Comments

  1. Report this comment

    Michael Stebbins said:

    Now that’s just plain funny. I think most of the readers would be curious to hear who the woman was. Any chance you or Jim Giles will reveal?