At the far end of the continuum, we have writing a text message with emojis and lols and such and you have fiction writing but then professionally we have writing a clinical note or a neuropsych report or a non-fiction book how is scientific writing specifically unique

I guess all those types of writing can be thought of as having two interrelatable but separable factors at the same time.

So one is the message and the other is the audience.

So as a writer, the trick is to figure out how to best convey that message to a particular audience in a way that that audience can understand and access it and use it.

Our job as writers is to have a really clear grasp of what the message is, a reasonable understanding of who the audience is, and then blend those two factors together to create an effective document.

There's even variability across different types of scientific writing, which can include technical reports, grant applications, communications for lay audience, or peer-reviewed papers.

Drilling down to peer-reviewed papers specifically, the primary message usually revolves around the first disclosure of original scientific content to an audience of professionals.

tables, figures, references, lit reviews, other things.

So how do you talk to trainees and other neuropsychologists about the advantages and disadvantages here?

That's really a nice overview of a complex problem because in the end, peer review right now is a service activity and very few of our service activities are reimbursed in any meaningful way except they're expected for academic promotion and being a good member of the neuroscience community.

So the guiding kind of bare minimum principle that I encourage people to operate under is give back to the system at least one more review than you take.

So that way, if everybody followed that same principle, then we would never have a shortage of reviewers.

So I think it's a nice way to think about it.

But as for the disadvantages, the absence of pay as a problem, there are some peer review activities on occasion that can provide pay.

So for example, some funding agencies will pay their reviewers.

Anything, any broad themes you'd like listeners to know, suggestions when going through these sections?

world that are like this, but how do you suggest identifying these type of journals and avoiding them?

Yeah, it's a really important question.

It's been remarkable to just watch the rise of these predatory journals and conferences over the past 10 years.

There's some estimates out there right now that there's between 10 and 15,000 predatory journals just waiting for your dollar.

And like you, I haven't seen any neuropsych-specific predatory journals.

There are some on the periphery, you know, in neuropsychiatry and neurology, but we haven't yet become the target for those folks yet.

But Most people who I know who publish receive multiple solicitations from predatory journals and conferences each week.

and achieve those broad