Outlining the Hidden Curriculum: Perspectives on Successfully Navigating Scientific Conferences

Scientific conferences and meetings are valuable opportunities for researchers to network, communicate, and develop knowledge. For early career scientists, conferences can also be intimidating, confusing, and overwhelming, especially without having adequate preparation or experience. In this Perspective, we provide advice based on previous experiences navigating scientific meetings and conferences. These guidelines outline parts of the hidden curriculum around preparing for and attending meetings, navigating conference sessions, networking with other scientists, and participating in social activities while upholding a recommended code of conduct.

Building a queer- and trans-inclusive microbiology conference

Microbiology conferences can be powerful places to build collaborations and exchange ideas, but for queer and transgender (trans) scientists, they can also become sources of alienation and isolation. Many conference organizers would like to create welcoming and inclusive events but feel ill-equipped to make this vision a reality, and a historical lack of representation of queer and trans folks in microbiology means we rarely occupy these key leadership roles ourselves. Looking more broadly, queer and trans scientists are systematically marginalized across scientific fields, leading to disparities in career outcomes, professional networks, and opportunities, as well as the loss of unique scientific perspectives at all levels. For queer and trans folks with multiple, intersecting, marginalized identities, these barriers often become even more severe. Here, we draw from our experiences as early-career microbiologists to provide concrete, practical advice to help conference organizers across research communities design inclusive, safe, and welcoming conferences, where queer and trans scientists can flourish.

Scientific conferences, socialization, and the Covid-19 pandemic: A conceptual and empirical enquiry

Since the 1970s social analysts have seen communication between scientists not solely as information exchange (the algorithmical model), but as a process of socialization into overlapping and mutually embedded scientific domains (the enculturational model). Under the algorithmical model, the impact of the Covid-19 shutdown on travel would be easily remedied by replacing face-to-face communication with online platforms. Conferences and similar gatherings are costly, elitist, and environmentally damaging, but under the enculturational model abandoning them could be disastrous for science, which depends on the development of cross-national trust and mutual agreements through face-to-face interaction and, in turn, disastrous for science's role in democracy. We explore the problem theoretically and empirically, arguing against recent proposals from some scientists for the wholesale and permanent replacement of conferences with remote communication.

The princess at the conference: Science, pacifism, and Habsburg society

Historians are showing increasing interest in scientific internationalism, the notion that science transcends national differences and hence advances peace and cooperation. This notion became particularly popular in the decades around 1900, the heyday of the universal expositions and the so-called first era of globalization. In this article I argue that in order to properly historicize scientific internationalism, it is imperative to understand how actors imagined science to have pacifist effects, and to relate their technoscientific to their geopolitical imaginaries. To illustrate this, I analyze the 1911 novel Der Menschheit Hochgedanken (translated as When Thoughts Will Soar) by the famous Austrian pacifist Baroness Bertha von Suttner. It tells the story of a scientific conference whose participants, by the sheer brilliance of their thought, ward off war and preserve world peace. Relating the novel to von Suttner's own life experiences, I situate her internationalism in the social texture and international relations of the late Habsburg Empire. It appears that Von Suttner mobilized notions of the pacific effects of science with an eye to preserving both the European system of states and the position of the aristocracy.

Burden and Characteristics of Unsolicited Emails from Medical/Scientific Journals, Conferences, and Webinars to Faculty and Trainees at an Academic Pathology Department

Background

Professionals and trainees in the medical and scientific fields may receive high e-mail volumes for conferences and journals. In this report, we analyze the amount and characteristics of unsolicited e-mails for journals, conferences, and webinars received by faculty and trainees in a pathology department at an academic medical center.

Methods

With informed consent, we analyzed 7 consecutive days of e-mails from faculty and trainees who voluntarily participated in the study and saved unsolicited e-mails from their institutional e-mail address (including junk e-mail folder) for medical/scientific journals, conferences, and webinars. All e-mails were examined for characteristics such as reply receipts, domain name, and spam likelihood. Journal e-mails were specifically analyzed for claims in the message body (for example, peer review, indexing in databases/resources, rapid publication) and actual inclusion in recognized journal databases/resources.

Results

A total of 17 faculty (4 assistant, 4 associate, and 9 full professors) and 9 trainees (5 medical students, 2 pathology residents, and 2 pathology fellows) completed the study. A total of 755 e-mails met study criteria (417 e-mails from 328 unique journals, 244 for conferences, and 94 for webinars). Overall, 44.4% of e-mails were flagged as potential spam by the institutional default settings, and 13.8% requested reply receipts. The highest burden of e-mails in 7 days was by associate and full professors (maximum 158 or approximately 8200 per year), although some trainees and assistant professors had over 30 e-mails in 7 days (approximately 1560 per year). Common characteristics of journal e-mails were mention of "peer review" in the message body and low rates of inclusion in recognized journal databases/resources, with 76.4% not found in any of 9 journal databases/resources. The location for conferences in e-mails included 31 different countries, with the most common being the United States (33.2%), Italy (9.8%), China (4.9%), United Kingdom (4.9%), and Canada (4.5%).

Conclusions

The present study in an academic pathology department shows a high burden of unsolicited e-mails for medical/scientific journals, conferences, and webinars, especially to associate and full professors. We also demonstrate that some pathology trainees and junior faculty are receiving an estimated 1500 unsolicited e-mails per year.

Accepted standards on how to give a Medical Research Presentation: a systematic review of expert opinion papers

Background: This systematic review aimed to extract recommendations from expert opinion articles on how to give a medical research presentation on a scientific conference and to determine whether the experts agree on what makes an effective or poor presentation. Methods: Presentation-related terms were searched within article titles listed in PubMed, restricting the search to English-language articles published from January 1975 to July 2015. Recommendations were extracted from the articles, grouped by content, and analyzed for frequency. Ninety-one articles were included. Among 679 different recommendations, 29 were given in more than 20% of articles each. The five most frequent recommendations were to keep slides simple, adjust the talk to the audience, rehearse, not read the talk from slides or a manuscript, and make eye contact. Results: No article gave advice that was the complete opposite of the 29 most frequent recommendations with the exception of whether a light or dark background should be used for slides. Conclusions: Researchers should comply with these widely accepted standards to be perceived as effective presenters.

Predatory publishing, questionable peer review, and fraudulent conferences

Open-access is a model for publishing scholarly, peer-reviewed journals on the Internet that relies on sources of funding other than subscription fees. Some publishers and editors have exploited the author-pays model of open-access, publishing for their own profit. Submissions are encouraged through widely distributed e-mails on behalf of a growing number of journals that may accept many or all submissions and subject them to little, if any, peer review or editorial oversight. Bogus conference invitations are distributed in a similar fashion. The results of these less than ethical practices might include loss of faculty member time and money, inappropriate article inclusions in curriculum vitae, and costs to the college or funding source.