Comments in defense of symposia proceedings: Response to Bart and Anderson

Deborah M. Finch; A. Lorin Ward; R. H. Hamre

Treesearch

Comments in defense of symposia proceedings: Response to Bart and Anderson

Formally Refereed

Authors:

Deborah M. Finch, A. Lorin Ward, R. H. Hamre

Year:

1982

Type:

Miscellaneous Publication

Station:

Rocky Mountain Research Station

Source:

Wildlife Society Bulletin. 10(2): 181-183.

Download (PDF 135 KB)

Download (PDF 135 KB): https://research.fs.usda.gov/download/treesearch/35517.pdf

Abstract

A recent "Opinion" in the Wildlife Society Bulletin (Bart and Anderson 1981) made a case against publishing symposia proceedings because (1) papers of non-refereed symposia often lack credibility and, therefore, harm both the authors and the profession, (2) proceedings are not readily retrievable, and (3) some symposium reports are not appropriate for publication. Although some proceedings may be disorganized and include poorly written papers, Bart and Anderson's generalization unnecessarily downgrades what can be an excellent tool for technology transfer. In this rebuttal opinion we give examples of outstanding symposia and proceedings and discuss advantages to symposia not mentioned by Bart and Anderson.

Keywords

symposia proceedings, technology transfer

Citation

Finch, Deborah M.; Ward, A. Lorin; Hamre, R. H. 1982. Comments in defense of symposia proceedings: Response to Bart and Anderson. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 10(2): 181-183.