Last week a couple of thousand of us turned up to within gliding distance of the London City Airport to attend Intecol. There we had the usual rounds of talks, meetings, coffee, lunches, workshops, more coffee, talks, and even fairy cakes. But the one thing that was new (aside from the usual new ecology) was the way the meeting worked with twitter.
Continue reading “MEE at TwIntecol 13”
Yesterday the ISI released their new impact factors: the second year we have been given one. And this year ours is 5.924 (that 4 at the end is vitally important. Vitally) This means we’re now 12th in the Ecology impact factor league tables (yes, Diversity and Distributions, we’re gunning for you next), and are still the highest BES journal. We have been asking those nice … Continue reading Our shiny new Impact Factor
We want your input. Because we#ve got a good idea, and we have some ideas about how to continue it, but we’re not sure how to start.
Continue reading “Methodological Notes”
So. Last week I was just west of Oslo, in Norway, for the third International Statistical Ecology Conference (as I write registration is still open). This is a core area for Methods, and there was a strong contingent of MEE editors, authors and reviewers present. This was a good opportunity to chat to them, and generally raise the profile of the journal. It’s always nice to get feedback, and also help potential authors thinking about submitting – and even one author who’s paper I had just rejected.
The weather was excellent throughout the meeting:
so, of course, we had to spend so much time inside. But what, you are wondering, did we talk about?
Continue reading “ISEC 2012: Ecological statistics in Norway”
Yesterday the ISI announced the 2011 impact factors. This is the first year Methods in Ecology and Evolution has been given an IF. And our factor is…
5.093
Continue reading “MEE has an impact factor”
Our latest wheeze at Methods is to suggest some ways of advertising your latest Methods paper. So, we now have a new section in our author guidelines giving some links to places you might want to go to to tell the world about your amazing new method to efficiently calculate the value of ecosystem services provided by the running of macroecology meetings. But we’re sure … Continue reading How to advertise your Methods paper (and can you suggest better ways?)
I hope that you all know that MEE publishes applications paper, which we make freely available for everyone to read, and the software is (of course) downloadable too. A couple of times over the last few weeks we have been asked to update some of the software code in the Applications. This presents us with a problem: whilst the occasional update is OK, if we … Continue reading Updates to Methods applications: we need your advice
(this is the first in a possibly irregular series of posts about papers that catch my eye. I don’t intend to only cover MEE papers, but I had to start somewhere)
A perennial worry for anyone building models for the real world is whether they actually represent the real world. If the whole process of finding and fitting a model has been done well, the model will represent the data. But the data is only part of the real world. How can we be sure our model will extrapolated beyond the data?
Continue reading “Why Simpler Models are Better”
You might have seen the adverts for the position of a new editor of MEE, to help Rob with the development of the journal. Well, after a gruelling process of interviews I was asked to take up the job. As you might have guessed, I accepted.
We’ll find out how my role will evolve, but it’s basically to be a mini-Freckleton, we’ll be splitting the workload of dealing with papers, and also working on the development of the journal. We had a meeting yesterday, where we discussed some new initiatives to try over the next few months, so stay tuned. Most of them are attempts to use social media (blogs, twitter etc.) more effectively to promote the journal and develop content.
But who am I?
Continue reading “Introducing … Myself”
Methods Blog 