If anyone has happened to check the “About the Editors” section on our webpage, you may have noticed that I am in the midst of my second stint at the journal. I worked here back in 2001 in between completing a master’s degree in the UK and a PhD at MIT, and then returned this year while I looked into postdoc options. I will be leaving at the end of January to start a postdoc in Andrew Oxenham’s lab at the University of Minnesota, and so the journal is looking for someone to take my place.

I would encourage anyone considering alternatives to the standard academic career in science to think about applying. I have enjoyed my time here tremendously and highly recommend the position.

I get asked all the time what it’s like to be an editor. The primary duties involve reading and evaluating manuscripts. Over 70% of submitted papers are rejected without review, and reading the submissions and then making those calls is one of the main responsibilities. Once a decision is made to send a paper out for review, you have to choose appropriate reviewers, and once the reviews are in, you have to come to a decision on what to do with the paper. Other responsibilities include commissioning and editing News and Views pieces and review articles, writing press releases, and attending scientific meetings. So there is not that much editing in the traditional sense of the word, although it is a component of the job. The job mostly involves thinking critically about science.

I really enjoy the work, so much so that I came back to work for the journal a second time. One of my favorite aspects of the job is that you get to be very broad, reading papers from quite a large expanse of the field. It’s quite different from scientific research, where typically we focus on very particular problems for long periods of time. You stay up to date on the entire field and continually learn new things. It’s also very different from research in that the rewards are more immediate. Every decision you make has tangible short-term consequences, and matters to a lot of people. Because the editorial decisions are so important to the people involved, and to the community at large, it’s easy to get excited about the day to day activities on the job. You are also constantly exposed to cutting edge work, sometimes being the first to hear about it. And you spend a lot of time talking with scientists, so you stay close to the research world even though you are not doing primary research.

The main official requirement is a PhD in neuroscience. My background is in the higher end of the field, but someone with molecular or cellular training would be equally welcome.

If you think you might be interested, you should submit a CV and cover letter to admin@natureny.com, and cc the editor in chief, Sandra Aamodt, at s.aamodt@natureny.com. If you have any questions about what is involved feel free to email me as well.