A linkurl:former member;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57440/ of the editorial board at linkurl:Medical Hypotheses;http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/623059/description#description has started a similar publication called linkurl:Hypotheses in the Life Sciences,;http://www.hy-ls.org/ following Elsevier's decision to institute a more traditional peer review process at the once editorially reviewed journal.
This fall, Hypotheses in the Life Sciences will begin publishing papers that introduce new ideas in biology that "advance or challenge scientific thinking," according to a press release from the journal's publisher, the University of Buckingham Press. The papers will be chosen primarily with the guidance of the editorial board, which includes Medical Hypotheses's linkurl:recently fired;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57204/ editor-in-chief linkurl:Bruce Charlton,;http://www.buckingham.ac.uk/publicity/dofe/charlton.html with occasional outside advice from the peer-review community for topics that are beyond the technical expertise of the board. "We're trying to steer a middle course [between] completely autonomous editorial choice and a more conventional peer review system," said the journal's founding editor linkurl:William Bains.;http://www.williambains.co.uk/ "What...
Medical HypothesesBioscience HypothesesMedical HypothesesMedical HypothesesThe Scientist
Interested in reading more?
Become a Member of
Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!