Scientific publication business is changing rapidly in recent years.
Previously, there was a hierarchy among publishers and journals for given research field.
The order/ranking was mostly defined by prestige and impact factor, a metric showing how many times on average other researchers cite the paper in the journal.
Then there came open access online journals. Traditional publishers also started using online open access format, with or without extra fee.
Now it is almost December, 2018. We have many more scientific journals with similar names. Many of them are new and online. They keep sending out solicitation for us to join the editorial board and do some work for them, so that their publication system stays alive.
Although the sense of "major" and "minor" journals is maintained among researchers specialized for the particular field, for lay people who do not know about the journals' prestige and rankings, the landscape of scientific publication has become quite confusing.
In such a messy era for scientific publication, publishers are also paying attention to improve their metrics.
There is a cycle: "Improved impact factor -> more prestige -> better attention from researchers -> attract better quality papers -> improved metrics -> Improved impact factor....."
They want to get this win-win cycle going.
As such, there are increasing amounts of efforts both on publishers' and researchers' sides for improving the visibility of their paper and the metrics.
Publishers began to get serious about improving metrics, by helping out researchers and their papers to get more attention.
One of such efforts is to send out "News and Views"-type follow up article. I got one, too.
So here it is.
I am a member of American Association for Cancer Research (AACR). It's annual meeting for 2019 will be held in Atlanta, GA in 3/29-4/3, 2019.
During 2018 I have been busy for Alzheimer's disease-related project, and I was not planning to go to the 2019 AACR meeting. But our Center for Cancer Prevention and Drug Development (CCPDD) wanted to send some abstracts for the AACR annual meeting. After talking with three post-doctoral members who may present the work, I sent out an abstract yesterday (official abstract deadline is today 11/15/18), along with a few other abstracts from the CCPDD.
Most of the results for my abstract were generated last year. Now I am busy writing up a manuscript for the project.
Writing a scientific paper is somewhat similar to making a picture story show, with rather structured storytelling pattern and no fictional picture allowed. Past three days were spent laying out the pictures (data, results), examining the pictures, and organizing the story. This was also a good time to plan ahead.
In many cases, future events and deadlines define what I need to do now. This is another example.
PS
Data and results are frequently confused, but they are not the same. Data is raw pile of data (frequently in a form of numbers) that you get from your experiment. A result is a message (or an answer to your research question) extracted from the data. Thus, a "result" is subjected to researcher's bias and interpretation, and we scientists are fussy about such bias and accuracy of "result". Preconception, prejudice, overstatement, over-speculation, over-interpretation, cherry-picking, .... all need to be weeded out.
This past weekend (11/9-10/2018), we had OK/KS state swing dance championship.
This event has been around as a place for friendly contests among several swing dance clubs in OK/KS states. People came from Oklahoma City (this year's host), Kansas City, Wichita, Tulsa, etc. It was an event with a good size, supported by many volunteering club members. I enjoyed meeting with friends and new people, and dancing with them.
Like trend in clothes, how we dance WCS shows a trend. About 10 years ago, cat-like smoothness was a trend. It was like a demonstration of moves of sorts.
Example:
MADjam 2009 Jordan Frisbee & Jessica Cox WCS Jack & Jill contest
In recent rears, exaggerated use of frame, especially among followers, and liberal slot usage, became more popular among traveling "top dancers" in WCS circuits. Overall, more "dancing".
Examples:
Jack & Jill O'Rama 2018 Strictly Swing A 1st Place - Thibault Ramirez & Victoria Henk
Jordan Frisbee & Larisa Tingle, Phoenix 4th of July 2018, 1st Place Champions
(the same guy, 9 years later)
Once a trend is set by traveling dancers, it may "trickle down" to intermediate/advanced dancers.
However, trend is not for everyone. Local dancers who do not compete in upper circles don't even need to follow trends. Or, probably they shouldn't. Most of them were simply not ready. Social dance depends on basics. How you enjoy dancing socially depends on your partner and what he/she got.
You can express your philosophy and demonstrate your knowledge and physical ability (or lack of) in your dance. It was interesting to see the difference among participants.
The level difference comes into play in contests.
For newcomer/novice, the contests were mostly whether they have good use of WCS basics. To compete, knowing and dancing basics, having quick feet (that can be used for syncopation and improvisation in upper level) yet demonstrating correct timing, and knowing positioning, are all necessary as expanded basics, especially for followers. It is obvious if they have them or not. If you are stumbling in your basics, you are not ready for upper level.
"Intermediate" is a tricky level. They may not have physical ability or fitness of advanced dancers yet. But they try. The pre-set patterns they can pull off help. To some extent, dancing is a demonstration (=external presentation) of your physical abilities. Some sorting can take place here.
"Advanced" level is a level you decide what to show. In other words, they both (lead and follow) have some grasp in how they look, by each and combined, while dancing. As WCS is generally a directional dance and has a front side and a rear side for show, they may calculate and include it in their performance, too. But at this level, the direction she is facing defines a slot. Much more freedom is allowed here.
Even for "advanced" dancers, recent trend may be hard to adopt. But it is a matter of choice. We will see and appreciate their choices.
Routines are entirely different game. Not many people try routines, but you can get whole new experience from dancing a routine. From spectator's standpoint, we can even see an art of "goof and recovery" (though I won't mention who).
.... These were some of what I was thinking during the event.
It was nice to get back to this dance I love.
"When you are not dancing Tango for a while, what would you lose?"
Think about it and come up an answer. I'll wait.
This is not a trick question or anything. But your answer reveal something about yourself.
If you list human relationship-kind of answer, like connection, sense of belonging to community, unity to partner, friendship, wine and fun time in milonga, etc, these are the personal meaning you find in the dance. You may be on the "feelie", or Sensing-Feeling side.
If your answer is more physical or technical, such as balance, posture, figure X or Y, they represent the way you find meaning in the dance. You may be on the "techie", or Thinking side.
It is not bad or anything. You would have to be at least at intermediate level to be able to talk about techniques, and I'd expect your dance level may be higher than those who grasp a dance only from emotional meaning to them.
Poets and dancers are not exactly the same people. Like musicians, dancers (or so-called "real dancers") carry highly technical requirements.
You need to align what you think, what you say, and what you do, to be most effective and live your life truthfully.
Dance techniques enable you to "do" the dance. Not only what you think or say. Bluntly put, a singer is hardly a singer without a voice. A dancer is hardly a dancer without physically presenting beauty of the dance.
For dance contests and auditions, how you dance here and now is what you got here and now. I like that kind of simplicity.
BTW, tomorrow Tuesday is midterm election day in the US.
I used to think, if your inner self (religious belief, spirituality, political good intention or malice, etc) can be physically seen like watching your dance, it would have been much easier.
