The saga of the journal comment.

Recently, Steinn brought our attention to some of the difficulties involved in getting a scientific journal to publish a “Comment” on an article. He drew on a document (PDF) by Prof. Rick Trebino of the Georgia Institute of Technology School of Physics detailing (in 123 numbered steps) his own difficulties in advancing what is supposed to be an ongoing conversation between practicing scientists in the peer reviewed scientific literature. Indeed, I think this chronology of exasperation raises some questions about just what interests journal editors are actually working towards, and about how as a result journals may be failing to play the role that the scientific community has expected them to play.
If the journals aren’t playing this role, the scientific community may well need to find another way to get the job done.
But I’m getting ahead of myself. First, let’s look at some key stretches of Trebino’s timeline:

1. Read a paper in the most prestigious journal in your field that “proves” that your entire life’s work is wrong.
2. Realize that the paper is completely wrong, its conclusions based entirely on several misconceptions. It also claims that an approach you showed to be fundamentally impossible is preferable to one that you pioneered in its place and that actually works. And among other errors, it also includes a serious miscalculation–a number wrong by a factor of about 1000–a fact that’s obvious from a glance at the paper’s main figure.
3. Decide to write a Comment to correct these mistakes–the option conveniently provided by scientific journals precisely for such situations.

Continue reading

Dem’s fightin’ words!

It was decided that the Free-Ride offspring are maybe, kind of, old enough to watch Raiders of the Lost Ark without having nightmares. Even though they haven’t seen it before, they seem to have picked up at least some general information about Indiana Jones as one of the canonical figures in American pop culture.
Dr. Free-Ride: So, what do you know about Indiana Jones?
Younger offspring: He’s a hero.
Dr. Free-Ride: Actually, he’s an archaeology professor at a university.
Younger offspring: No he’s not!
Dr. Free-Ride: Yes he is! He’s a professor just like me! Maybe I’m a hero, too.
Younger offspring: You’re not a hero or a professor! You’re a philosophist!
Dr. Free-Ride: Oh no you didn’t!
* * * * *
We’re watching it now, less than an hour in. The sprogs were unconvinced that the guy in the suit and horn-rimmed glasses writing stuff on the chalkboard in the classroom was actually the same guy with the bullwhip who defeated the booby-traps in the opening sequence.
Meanwhile, I’m now wondering whether his collection of artifacts falls within the bounds of international treaties and professional ethics. And I kind of hate that traitorous monkey.

Friday Sprog Blogging: Kids Day at SLAC 2009.

Thanks again to the generosity of Free-Ride friend LO, the elder Free-Ride offspring will be partaking in this year’s Kids Day at SLAC today. And, once again, the younger Free-Ride offspring is chagrined to be too young to participate. Since next year both sprogs will meet the age requirement, though, the younger Free-Ride offspring got to participate in this year’s review of the workshop safety information.
Dr. Free-Ride: You are workshop option B. So, the first activity: paleontology. Do you know what that is, younger offspring?
Younger offspring: Yes.
Dr. Free-Ride: What is paleontology?

Continue reading

Name-changes, social science research, and USA Today.

I’m not a regular reader of USA Today, but Maria tweeted this story, and I feel like I need to say something about it or else risk leaving it rattling around in my head like marbles under a hubcap:

About 70% of Americans agree, either somewhat or strongly, that it’s beneficial for women to take her husband’s last name when they marry, while 29% say it’s better for women to keep their own names, finds a study being presented today at the American Sociological Association’s annual meeting in San Francisco.
Researchers from Indiana University and the University of Utah asked about 815 people a combination of multiple choice and open-ended questions to come up with the findings.
Laura Hamilton, a sociology researcher at Indiana University and one of the study authors, says that while gender-neutral terms such as “chairperson” have become commonplace, the same logic hasn’t carried over to name change.
“One of the most interesting things is that a lot of people assume that because language in general is gender-neutral, that name change would also be one of those things in which attitudes would be shifting towards being much more liberal,” she says.
But she says some studies have found that younger women are as likely or more likely to change their name when they marry as their baby boom counterparts. “It’s not a straight age trend.”
Respondents who said that women should change their names tended to view it as important for establishing a marital and family identity, she says, while those who thought women should keep their own names focused on the importance of a woman establishing a professional or individual identity.
Hamilton says that about half of respondents went so far as to say that the government should mandate women to change their names when they marry, a finding she called “really interesting,” considering typical attitudes towards government intervention. “Americans tend to be very cautious when it comes to state intervention in family life,” she says.

Continue reading

Lunch plate audit.

PalMD is trying to eat better (and drop a little weight). Dr. Isis has been offering some advice on what sorts of meals might help Pal cut the calories while still being healthy and satisfying. Pal has been taking the advice to heart, but finds time constraints an impediment to the kind of food he want to be eating.
As you might guess, my work and family situation give me some experience in throwing together meals under time pressure. So I wanted to offer a couple of quick recipes to Pal. But I also thought I’d page Dr. Isis to see if she’d weigh in on the nutritional punch these dishes pack (or don’t).
Here’s my lunch plate from today:

LunchPlate.jpg

Continue reading

Discuss “Unscientific America” Saturday at Firedoglake Book Salon.

For those of you who have been following the various online reviews of and reactions to Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum’s book Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens Our Future, you may be interested in the Firedoglake Book Salon discussion of the book. The discussion takes place Saturday (tomorrow), 5-7 pm Eastern (2-4 pm Pacific; those of you in other time zones can probably calculate your local time equivalent better than I), will include author Chris Mooney, and will be hosted by yours truly.
Given that I’m pretty convinced I have the best commentariat in the blogosphere, I’m hopeful that a bunch of you will be able to join us!

Friday Sprog Blogging: rocks and erosion.

Yesterday afternoon, I attempted to talk with the younger Free-Ride offspring about erosion. It would seem, from our conversation, that it is not just rocks that can erode — recall of material learned in science class can also erode, as can patience.
Below is a rough transcript of our chat. I’ll see if I can clean up the audio and put the MP3 up as a SprogCast by sometime this weekend.
Dr. Free-Ride: I wanted to ask you what you can tell me about rocks. I think you learned a little about rocks in school, didn’t you?
Younger offspring: No.
Dr. Free-Ride: No? Did you learn something about different kinds of rocks?
Younger offspring: No.
Dr. Free-Ride: No? Am I thinking about your sibling?
Younger offspring: Yes.

Continue reading

In which the elder Free-Ride offspring channels Descartes.

At bedtime, after the reading of the stories, the younger Free-Ride offspring lay upon Dr. Free-Ride’s better half, and Dr. Free-Ride’s better half responded by making strangling noises. Of course, I called in from the other room to remind the children that homicide, whether intentional or accidental, is forbidden in the house.
Younger offspring: I’m not killing him! He’s pretending!
Dr. Free-Ride’s better half: Actually, I’m pretending to be alive.
Elder offspring: Pretending means you are alive. If you weren’t alive, you wouldn’t be able to pretend anything.
Dr. Free-Ride: Well played, child!

Friday Sprog Blogging: scientific questions on summer vacation.

Yes, it’s a day late. Dr. Free-Ride and Dr. Free-Ride’s better half are currently engaged in sprog retrieval maneuvers at the home of the Grandparents Who Lurk But Seldom Comment. What follows is this morning’s attempt to get the Free-Ride offspring to tell us something science-y.
Dr. Free-Ride: Were there any things you noticed while you were away from us that you think might have to do with science?
Younger offspring: I noticed that when I go in the ocean, the salt water makes my eyes red, and I wanted to know why.
Dr. Free-Ride: That sounds like a reasonable matter for scientific enquiry.

Continue reading