« Journey's end for four postdoc journals | Main | Incentives needed for genome annotation »

Bookmark in Connotea

The week on Nature Network: Friday 23 January

This weekly Nautilus column highlights some of the online discussion at Nature Network in the preceding week that is of relevance to scientists as authors.
The Nature Network week column is archived here.

Mike Fowler muses on the age-old (fossil illustration included) dilemmas not only of keeping up with the current literature, but also how young scientists can get to grips with all the old literature. He pictures this problem as an upside down pyramid.

Access to information and filtering out the important information are also topics addressed by Martin Fenner in the context of medical research, in a post rehearsing the author's contribution to last week's ScienceOnline09 conference. He writes: "There are many reasons why people are interested in reporting or learning about medical research. But betroffenheit [see his post for a definition] and financial interests are two very strong reasons that should always be kept in mind. "

Ai Lin Chun, a senior editor at Nature Nanotechnology, shares with readers of the Asia-Pacific and beyond forum some tips on the types of things one would learn in an editorial job. Her post is intended to help those interested in editorial jobs to reflect if these activities are things that really interest them, and if they are skills that people want to build.

For scientists interested in starting a blog, here are some words in a comment from Stephen Curry: "Maybe it’s too easy to forget what it was like before you jumped in. I had been mulling over starting a blog for about a year before I actually got started. I even did a hidden dry run on Blogger to see what it would feel like. However, starting for real on Blogger didn’t seem feasible – I couldn’t see how the blog would ever get noticed. Only when I discovered Nature Network (NN), first as a reader, then a commenter did an opportunity begin to emerge: it had a ready-made audience with strong scientific interests. But only by attending the conference in London last August (which itself took a little gumption) did I realise that pitching in might not be too horrendous. And now, looking back, I think “What was I worried about?” But I imagine there are plenty of others out there who have similar concerns that they haven’t yet worked through. Hopefully they will see the friendliness of NN as genuine and dip a toe in the water. It’s not that cold. Really." If you are tempted, you can start the process at Nature Network here. As Eva Amsen writes, the entire Internet turns out to be a small, even friendly, village.

Further science-related blog reading and online discussion can be enjoyed at:
Planet Nature
Nature.com's science blogs index and tracker
Nature Network's many blogs and forums
Science Online FriendFeed room.

Previous Nature Network columns.

Post a comment

Comments will be reviewed by the blog editors before being published, mainly to ensure that spam and irrelevant material (such as product advertisements) are not published . Please keep your comment brief. Excessively long or offensively phrased entries will be edited. Remember this blog is for feedback and discussion of matters concerning scientific authorship or peer-review - not for drawing attention to your research.

If you want to know if a NPG journal would be interested in your research, you will need to contact the journal's editorial office, which can be done via the authors & referees website.

We strongly encourage you to use your real, full name. E-mail addresses are required in case we need to discuss your comment with you directly. We won't publish your e-mail address unless you request it.

Please enter the numbers you see below - this helps us to avoid spam. If you are having trouble with this system, you can send your comment by e-mail to 'authors at nature dot com'.

please enter code