CSE 2009 Annual Meeting

Keynote Address
What’s the Matter with Memory?

Elizabeth Loftus PhD, Distinguished Professor, University of California, Irvine

New studies show the power of suggestion to make people believe that they have had experiences that they didn’t have. People have been led to remember nonexistent events from the recent past as well as non-existent events from their childhood. They can be led to falsely believe that they have had familiar experiences, but also rather bizarre or implausible ones (e.g., that they witnessed demonic possession as a child). They can be led to believe that they did things that would have been impossible (e.g., that they shook hands with Bugs Bunny during a trip to Disneyland). They can also be led to falsely believe that they had experiences that would have been highly traumatic had they actually happened.

False beliefs have consequences for people, affecting later thoughts and behaviors. For example, people who are led to believe that as children they got sick eating particular foods show avoidance of those foods later on. False memories are important in life, especially in legal cases. When witnesses testify, they are often detailed, confident, and emotional. Juries are impressed. But people can be detailed, confident, and emotional even when the memories are false. That’s why they are so hard to spot. This session will address the importance of explaining scientific data effectively in a variety of non-research settings.

Elizabeth Loftus is the author of Eyewitness Testimony and co-author of The Myth of Repressed Memory. No stranger to controversy, she is an expert on the psychology of memory, false memory, and eyewitness testimony. Dr. Loftus is a distinguished professor at the University of California, Irvine and holds positions in the Departments of Psychology and Social Behavior, and Criminology, Law and Society.

A1. Why Should Editors Do Research?

  • Drummond Rennie, MD, Deputy Editor, JAMA
  • Ana Marusic, MD, Editor-in-Chief, Croatian Medical Journal; Daniel T. Kulp, PhD, Editorial Director, American Physical Society

Editors’ jobs are becoming more challenging every year, with increasing responsibilities and fewer resources. Why should editors conduct research? How can they manage to conduct research as part of their already busy schedules? What important information can they find out when they do? Join three veteran editors as they share their experiences with conducting, interpreting, and applying research.


Christine Laine, MD
Senior Deputy Editor, Annals of Internal Medicine

A2. How to Make Science Interesting, and Why It’s Important

  • Bruce Lewenstein, PhD, Professor of Science Communication, Cornell University
  • Chris Mooney, science writer and author, The Republican War on Science and the upcoming Unscientific America

We often hear from scientists, educators, and policymakers that public interest in and understanding of science is on the wane, with dire implications for America’s research enterprise and competitive standing worldwide. But what do we really know about the state of scientific literacy among the public and the impact it might be having? If things are indeed as bad as we hear they are, how did they get that way, and what’s to be done? Do scientists and professional publishers have a special obligation to help, or is public education just not their problem? We’ll explore these and other issues with authorities in this field.


John Tagler, MLIS
Vice President & Executive Director, Professional & Scholarly Publishing, Association of American Publishers, Inc. (AAP/PSP)

A3. Conflict of Interest: Issues, Policy, and Practice

  • Laurence Hirsch, MD, Vice President, Medical Affairs, Becton Dickinson, and Immediate Past President, International Society for Medical Publication Professionals
  • Katrina Kelner, PhD, Deputy Editor, Life Sciences, Science
  • Sarah Tegen, PhD, Assistant Director for Editorial Development, Journals Publishing Program, American Chemical Society

At both scientific journals and pharmaceutical companies, conflicts of interest that may influence publication decisions are a daily concern. Journal editors worry about the accuracy or completeness of data in industry-funded manuscripts. Pharmaceutical writers and editors worry that journals and peer reviewers may have a bias against their manuscripts. Examples abound in both settings, but unambiguous policies and practices can make the management of conflicts of interest less worrisome. Panelists in this session include speakers from both scientific publishing and the pharmaceutical industry.


Michele Vivirito
Medical Writing Director, Amgen Inc.

A4. Freelancing Roundup

  • Janis Ramey, MS, Ramey Technical Writing
  • Seth Beckerman, MA, Business & Technical Communications

Join two experienced freelance writers for a broad review of freelancing, including marketing, resources, finances, client relations, and professionalism. New freelancers—or those who seek to make the move to freelancing—are invited to ask questions, and those with experience can share their wisdom.


Gabe Waggoner, MS
Freelance Writer

B1. Bridging the Geographic Science Gap: Modes of Quantitative Analysis for Scientific Papers

  • Patricia Brennan, MSIS, Manager of Evaluative Products and Services, Thomson Reuters
  • Jevin D. West, PhD Candidate, Head Developer of Eigenfactor.org, Department of Biology, University of Washington
  • David Tempest, MBA, Associate Director, Scientometrics & Knowledge Management, Elsevier

How are scientific papers and journals ranked and evaluated? This session will give an in-depth overview of quantitative evaluation systems for scientific papers, looking at the long-established and the newer methods to rank and correlate scientific research.


Adrian Stanley
Chief Executive Officer, The Charlesworth Group (USA)

B2. Science Editing Goes Global: CSE International Scholars, Editor Link, and AuthorAID

  • Iain E.P. Taylor, PhD, Professor Emeritus, University of British Columbia Botanical Garden
  • CSE Scholars; Barbara Gastel, MD, Professor, Texas A&M University

How can science editors learn from and collaborate with editors and authors in countries with developing economies? The 2009 CSE Scholars will discuss how CSE, through its Editor Link program, can assist them and their colleagues in developing and improving their journals so that the substantial amount of research in resource-poor countries can be delivered effectively to the worldwide scientific community. Learn more about AuthorAID (www.authoraid.info), a program to help researchers in developing countries publish and otherwise communicate their work. Provide your suggestions for how to make this resource as useful as possible to editors and authors.


Iain E.P. Taylor

B3. Greening Up Journals, Meetings, and Offices: Get Started Now!

  • Sue Silver, PhD, Editor-in-Chief, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment
  • Kevin Pirkey, Vice President, Odyssey Press and Allen Press Inc.
  • Mark Leahy, General Manager, David L. Lawrence Convention Center

Printing your journal on recycled paper is important, but where else can you “green” up? Meetings, office supplies, lighting, heating, and cooling can all help reduce your carbon footprint. It’s not as difficult as you think. Come and hear some innovative ideas about how you can help your organization save the planet.


Anna Sullivan
Senior Account Executive, Allen Press, Inc.

B4. Framing Science: Meeting the Needs of Diverse Audiences

  • Matthew C. Nisbet, PhD, Assistant Professor, American University School of Communication
  • Ginger Pinholster, Director, Office of Public Programs, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)

Communicating science accurately and compellingly is more important than ever. How various audiences receive your message can affect public policy, funding, legislation, personal action, and even the future of the planet. A scholar who defined the concept of framing science and an experienced communicator will share their strategies for clear communication.


Jonathan Lifland, MS
Media and Communications Manager, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)

C1. Bridging the Geographic Science Gap: Editors’ View of Evaluating and Rating Scientific Papers

  • Mauricio Rocha e Silva, MD, Editor, CLINICS
  • Ana Marusic, MD, Editor-in-Chief, Croatian Medical Journal
  • Adrian Stanley, Chief Executive Officer, The Charlesworth Group (USA)

This session will pick up where Session B1, “Bridging the Geographic Science Gap: Modes of Quantitative Analysis for Scientific Papers” left off. Peer review is the pre-publication gold standard for evaluating scientific papers. Quantitative evaluation through citations is widely used post-publication, but when and how it should be used are hotly debated. This session looks at long-established and at newer methods to rank scientific research papers, through the eyes of editors, publishers, and readers from around the world.


Rebecca S. Benner
Managing Editor, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists

C2. Industry Update: What You Need to Know about the Initiatives of Professional Societies

  • John Tagler, MLIS, Vice President & Executive Director, Professional & Scholarly Publishing, Association of American Publishers, Inc. (AAP/PSP)
  • Isabel Czech, Executive Director, Association of Learned and Society Publishers (ALPSP) North America
  • Ross MacIntyre, MSc, Committee Member, UK Serials Group (UKSG)
  • Harvey Marcovitch, PhD, Chairman, Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

Other professional societies worldwide have undertaken projects that can affect and inform CSE members and other science editors. Learn about their efforts on copyright protection, piracy, and intellectual property; their research on journal industry statistics, scholarly publishing practice, journal article versions, and publisher policies on author rights; their initiatives such as Project Transfer, Knowledge Bases and Related Tools (KBART), Journal Usage Factor, and Publisher and Institutional Repository Usage Statistics (PIRUS); and their insights on publication ethics and pharmaceutical research.


Christine Arturo
Acquisitions Manager, BCSC, American Academy of Ophthalmology

C3. How to Ensure the Integrity of Research Data in Published Papers: Images, Statistics, and the Editors’ Role

  • Robert D. Cardiff, MD PhD, Director, Center for Genomic Pathology, University of California, Davis
  • Steven Goodman, MD MHS PhD, Acting Director, Oncology Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, and Senior Statistical Editor, Annals of Internal Medicine

Editors must ensure that published research is sound. Two factors make this responsibility challenging. 1) Research is complicated, with a dearth of experts to provide advice, for example, on mouse pathology or biostatistical analysis. 2) Software used to present data is sophisticated. As we pull primary data together from multiple sources, the potential for error and the temptation to mislead increase. Panelists in this session will present examples of mistakes and misrepresentations and offer advice for minimizing the publication of errors and deceptions.


Vivian Siegel, PhD
Director, Center for Science Communication, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, and Editor-in-Chief, Disease Models & Mechanisms, Executive Editor, Journal of the American Society of Nephrology

D1. What Do We Know about Editorial Decision Making?

  • Drummond Rennie, MD, Deputy Editor, JAMA
  • Kirby Lee, PharmD, Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacy, University of California, San Francisco
  • Ellen Weber, MD, Professor of Emergency Medicine, University of California, San Francisco

Editors know all about decision making; they do it every day. But is deciding what to publish a science or an art? What factors influence decision making and the peer-review process? What psychological factors may subconsciously influence an editor’s decision? Join three researchers with very different perspectives on editorial decision making to learn more about the many influences on the editorial decisions you make.


Bruce Dancik, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, NRC Research Press

D2. The Evidence on Open Access

  • Tim Ingoldsby, Director of Strategic Initiatives & Publisher Relations, American Institute of Physics
  • Philip M. Davis, PhD Candidate, Department of Communication, Cornell University
  • Jocalyn Clark, PhD, Senior Editor, PLoS Medicine

There is growing attention and obligation to disseminate research in open-access forums. Open access provides free availability to and unrestricted use of scientific literature. Speakers will discuss recent research that investigates the impact of open-access publishing and self-archiving on citation, readership, accessibility, and the influence of scientific articles.


Catherine Nancarrow
Managing Editor, PLoS Computational Biology, PLoS Genetics, PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, PLoS Pathogens

D3. Copyright, Open Access, Subscriptions, and Permissions: What Editors Need to Know in the New Digital Publishing Environment

  • John Wilbanks, VP, Science, Creative Commons
  • Christopher Kenneally, Director, Author Relations, Copyright Clearance Center
  • Dale D. Berkley, PhD JD, Senior Attorney, National Institutes of Health

Find out what science editors need to know about copyright and how it has traditionally been managed, as well as the various practices in place today (copyright transfer, license to publish, creative commons) and what they mean for authors and publishers (rights, liabilities, permissions). Discover copyright myths and facts, and learn what policies might be on the horizon (derivative use, attributions).


Joy Moore
VP, Global Partnerships, Seed Media Group

D4. Word Tips for Editors

  • Bruce Rosenblum, CEO, Inera, Inc.
  • Nathan Day, AM, Customer Support Specialist, Inera, Inc.

In this session, participants will get tips on how to work more efficiently by using the advanced (and often hidden) features of Word, with a focus on Word as an editing rather than an authoring tool. The curriculum includes personalizing Word, formatting options, document navigation, shortcuts, and more. The session will also address variations in these tools for different versions of Word (e.g., 2003 and 2007).


Margaret (Peggy) Perkins, MA
Director of Manuscript Editing, New England Journal of Medicine

E1. Ethics Clinic

Ethical concerns in publishing involve not only blatant misconduct but also more commonplace behaviors incompatible with publishing-industry values. This interactive session from the CSE Editorial Policy Committee is designed to give attendees the opportunity to discuss specific ethical cases and how they might be handled. In keeping with the meeting theme of “Show Me the Data” we will discuss data sharing, dual use, and more.


Robert L. Edsall
MPhil, Editorial Director, Publications Division, American Academy of Family Physicians

E2. How to Deal with Funding Mandates

  • Neil M. Thakur, PhD, Special Assistant to the National Institutes of Health Deputy Director for Extramural Research
  • Amy Brand, PhD, Program Manager, Harvard University Office for Scholarly Communication
  • Dominic Mitchell, Publication Manager, UK, HighWire Press
  • Ross MacIntyre, MSc, Committee Member, UK Serials Group (UKSG)

Funding bodies and academic institutions worldwide are beginning to mandate deposition of scholarly articles in open-access repositories. This session will address the rationale behind these mandates and the practical side of dealing with them. What are the pros and cons of publisher compliance, and how can compliance be facilitated?


Erika Linke, MLS
Associate Dean of University Libraries, Carnegie Mellon University

E3. What’s New with Search Engines?

  • Raul Valdes-Perez, PhD, CEO, Vivisimo

This session will cover advances in the search experience, where bare-bones lists of results are shifting toward richer interfaces that incorporate spotlighting, social search, clustering, and navigation by metadata. Find out what these developments mean for science journals.


Seth Beckerman, MA
Business & Technical Communications

F1. How Do We Minimize Bias in Peer Review?

  • Trish Groves, MBBS MRCPsych, Deputy Editor, BMJ
  • Amber E. Budden, PhD, postdoctoral scholar, National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, University of California, Santa Barbara;
  • Mauricio Rocha e Silva, MD, Editor, CLINICS

Peer-review processes are not wholly objective, but involve bias. Speakers will discuss the debate on open versus closed peer review, the evidence on quality of reviews by author- versus editor-suggested reviewers, the particular challenges within small or specialist scientific communities, and research on which author demographics predict the outcome of the review process. The session will suggest ways to improve the experience and practice of peer review for authors, reviewers, and editors.


Jocalyn Clark, PhD
Senior Editor, PLoS Medicine

F2. Research 101: How to Make Theory, Hypothesis Testing, Experimental Design, Statistics, and Google Analytics Work for You

  • Julie Fiez, PhD, Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh
  • Christian Schunn, PhD, Associate Professor of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh
  • Robbin Steif, CEO, LunaMetrics, LLC

This tutorial will cover how to conduct research about your publications and users. Learn how to formulate and test hypotheses, such as those on manuscript quality, review quality, and review timeliness. Find out how to answer key editorial and publishing questions through experimental design, statistical approaches, and data analysis, such as using Google Analytics to mine your Web site usage data.


SiNae Pitts, PhD
Founder & CEO, Amphetamobile, LLC

F3. How to Communicate with the Media…and Stay Out of Trouble

  • Ginger Pinholster, Director, Office of Public Programs, AAAS
  • Jonathan Lifland, MS, Media and Communications Manager, PNAS
  • Andy Burness, President, Burness Communications

Communicating science to the public and to various other audiences can be fraught with unforeseen consequences. How do you communicate what’s important about new research clearly and without ambiguity? Experts in the high points and pitfalls of working with the media will share their secrets with you.


Bill Silberg
Vice President, Publishing and Communications, New York Academy of Sciences

G1. Report from an Authorship Retreat

  • Christine Laine, MD, Senior Deputy Editor, Annals of Internal Medicine
  • Ana Marusic, MD, Editor-in-Chief, Croatian Medical Journal

Scientific publications are moving toward greater transparency regarding individuals’ contributions. However, “authorship” remains closely tied to the act of writing, practices such as ghost and guest authorship persist, multi-collaborator and interdisciplinary research highlights differences in practices, and debate exists about the appropriateness of engaging professional writers. An Authorship Retreat held separate from the CSE Annual Meeting will gather stakeholders to develop a modern definition for “authorship” and recommendations for responsible communication of the contributions of individuals to scientific publications. This session will report on the retreat outcomes and seek attendee input for an authorship definition.


Diane Scott-Lichter
Publisher, American Association for Cancer Research

G2. Challenges of Creating Digital Libraries: Digitizing, Organizing, Storing, and Accessing Content

  • Gloriana St. Clair, PhD, Dean, Carnegie Mellon University Libraries
  • Ron Larsen, PhD, Dean, School of Information Sciences, University of Pittsburgh
  • Edward Galloway, MLIS, Head, Archives Service Center, University Library System, University of Pittsburgh

How are digital libraries created, maintained, and used? How do we create interfaces that allow readers to find and use materials? Panelists discuss the dynamic world of digital libraries, with an emphasis on scholarly content and audiences. Topics include: technologies, infrastructure, choosing and maintaining a myriad of content types, robust search and retrieval and patron usage, plus lessons learned.


Tracey DePellegrin Connelly, MA
Executive Editor, GENETICS

G3. Choosing and Changing Publishing Vendors

  • John Hawley, Executive Director, The American Society for Clinical Investigation
  • George Kendall, MA, Managing Editor, Anesthesiology
  • Frank Stumpf, Independent Consultant and Board Advisor

Outsourcing operations? Pulling functions in house? Transitioning work to a new vendor? Whether you have changes in the works or are simply mulling over future possibilities, this session will provide process and workflow insights. Get the lessons learned from two publishers’ real-life experiences, and find out what makes a transition successful from a vendor’s perspective.


Dana Compton
Production Manager, PNAS

H1. Control C, Control V: Plagiarism Detection in a Web 2.0 World

  • Harold “Skip” Garner, PhD, P.O’B. Montgomery Distinguished Chair and Professor of Biochemistry and Internal Medicine, UT Southwestern Medical Center
  • Harvey Marcovitch, PhD, Chairman, Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
  • Bernard Rous, Deputy Director of Publications and Electronic Publishing Program Director, Association for Computing Machinery

Learn how to define plagiarism, detect it, and deal with its ramifications. This session will explore plagiarism and plagiarism detection from theoretical, technical and operational perspectives.


Kirsty Meddings
Project Manager, CrossRef

H2. What Editors Need to Know about the Required Registration of Clinical Trials and its Impact on Publishing Clinical Trial Results

  • Tracy Beck, PhD, Consultant Global Medical Business Operations, Eli Lilly and Company
  • Trish Groves, MBBS, MRCPsych, Deputy Editor, BMJ

Certain laws require the registration of clinical trials and the public posting of trial results. This panel will focus on the rationale for the requirements and the challenges that exist in meeting the requirements of clinical trial registry posting that may be considered pre-publication, while maintaining the ability to publish clinical trial results in medical journals. Panel participants will address the issues from a variety of perspectives, including industry, government, and medical publishing.


Barbara N. Campaigne, PhD
Visiting Professor, Kinesiology and Applied Health Science, Indiana University

H3. How to Assess and Deploy Web Enhancements

  • John Shaw, Executive Director of Publishing Technologies, Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Kevin Cohn, Director of Client Services, Atypon Systems, Inc.
  • Michael Clarke, MA, Director, Business and Product Development, American Medical Association
  • Joel Hammond, Director, Product Management and Development, Thomson Reuters

In the face of rapidly changing technology, science editors must be agile and provide their readers, authors, and editors with the services they need to further the communication of scientific research. This session will help you assess and deploy meaningful new features for online journals. What works and what doesn’t, and how do you decide?


John Shaw