| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Editor-in-Chief
Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Jeffrey D. Blaustein, Ph.D., Editor-in-Chief, Endocrinology, Center for Neuroendocrine Studies, 135 Hicks Way, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003-9271. E-mail: endocrinology{at}cns.umass.edu.
I am moving from my job as one of the Editors of Endocrinology to Editor-in-Chief with a great deal of enthusiasm and respect for the history of this journal. The most recent Editors-in-Chief, P. Michael Conn, Shlomo Melmed, Kenneth Korach, and Jeffrey Pessin, each played a major role in establishing Endocrinology as what is arguably the premier journal publishing all facets of non-clinical, basic research in the discipline of Endocrinology. I have been handed the reins of a revered journal and, with them, the challenge of following some very tough acts.
This journal, formerly named Endocrinology: The Bulletin of the Association for the Study of the Internal Secretions, was first published in 1917 with Roy Graham Hoskins as the Editor (1, 2). At that time, the Association for the Study of the Internal Secretions, the predecessor of The Endocrine Society, had just formed, the term "hormone" had first been used a dozen years earlier, and the term "endocrinology" had been in the lexicon for a mere 8 years (3). The brain and the gut, like many other tissues, had been excluded from the endocrine system (4), and the nervous system and the endocrine system were considered to be distinct entities, not an integrated system, as we now view their place in the body.
As an integrative endocrinologist, R. G. Hoskins believed in the connection between the endocrine and other systems, including the nervous system, and he believed in a connection of hormones to behavior and mental health. As a champion of integrative endocrinology, Hoskins directed the Foundation for Neuro-Endocrine Research at the Harvard Medical School in 1927, long before Neuroendocrinology as a discipline even existed. As a neuroendocrinologist, whose research interests include behavior, I was astounded by the integrative forward thinking espoused by Hoskins over 70 years ago in a paper in the Psychoanalytic Quarterly (5). He wrote, "In so far then as one honestly repudiates the mind-body disjunction he must concede an important role to the hormones as determinants of personality. It is, however, unfortunately true that competent psychologists have been little attracted to endocrinology as a field for serious work and that endocrinologists have shied away from the intangibles of psychology. The result is that one of the fundamentally important chapters of endocrinology remains yet largely to be written."
As Editor-in-Chief of this journal, it is important to define Endocrinology. Definitions of the discipline nearly always include a statement about secretion of hormones from ductless glands. However, definitions evolve to encompass new findings. Study of a hormone that also acts in the brain as a neurotransmitter is Endocrinology. Steroid receptors, long believed to require steroid hormones for activation, can be activated by many nonhormonal pathways. Study of the nonhormonal, intracellular signaling pathways is still Endocrinology. We now know that the brain, the gut, and adipose tissue, as well as other tissues, not only respond to hormones, but synthesize and secrete them as well. Endocrinologists study secretions from tissues that originally were not considered endocrine glands. These discoveries, and many more, revolutionized the discipline of Endocrinology. The continued evolution of Endocrinology has required an open mind, and as endocrinologists, we accept work that does not fit into traditional definitions of the discipline. To modify Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart’s famous quote about pornography in 1964: "I know Endocrinology when I see it." Endocrinology is no longer merely the study of secretions of ductless glands. Research that fits into the discipline of Endocrinology will always be in the eyes of the beholder, and our definition will continue to evolve. As it does, our journal will continue to evolve with it.
When Jeffrey Pessin took over the helm of Endocrinology 5 years ago, he wrote about the impending experiment of our journal review process going completely electronic (6). Under his stewardship, this has been a resounding success, and I want to thank him on behalf of the entire endocrine community for seeing the journal through this transition. I also thank him personally for teaching me many of the ropes of being Editor-in-Chief of a prestigious journal like Endocrinology. I thank my co-editors Rebecca Bahn, Mary Dallman, Daniel Drucker, John Funder, Stuart Ralston, Deborah Segaloff, and Terry Unterman as well as the colleagues, who submitted their best work, and our reviewers, all of whom helped to usher the Journal’s review process into the electronic phase. Thanks are also due to our Managing Editor Scott Herman and his editorial staff as well as the committees and staff of The Endocrine Society, who provided the support that ensured success.
In an effort to expand our expertise into as many realms of contemporary Endocrinology as possible, we have increased the number of editors of the journal from eight to 10. My new team of editors includes Antonio Bianco, Denis Baskin, Orla Conneely, Peter Fuller, Konstantin Kandror, Derek Leroith, Neil MacLusky, Margaret McCarthy, Aniko Naray-Fejes-Toth, and Rajesh Thakker. Managing Editor Scott Herman and his staff and Editorial Assistant Renee Pessin will be working with us, the editorial board, reviewers, and authors to continue the long tradition of Endocrinology as the leading, non-clinical, basic research journal covering all aspects of Endocrinology.
Our goal is for Endocrinology to remain a premier journal. We will increase the number of well-received, invited mini-reviews, and we will continue to publish them in quarterly series on specific topics. In an effort to keep our journal readable and to be able to publish as much excellent work as possible, we have instituted manuscript length guidelines; we will be encouraging succinctness with a request that the length of papers not exceed eight journal pages. Increased use of supplemental material, which is made available online, should make this possible. We have replaced Brief Communications with Technical Communications. Brief Communications were once published more rapidly than full-length submissions, because they were submitted camera-ready. With the introduction of the electronic manuscript review process, full-length papers are published as rapidly, so brief papers will now be reviewed as full-length regular papers. However, short technical reports of new techniques or new animal or cell models that would be of immediate interest to our readers or novel approaches to endocrine problems that would be of great interest to our readers will be considered as Technical Communications. These will also include occasional invited explanations of emerging technologies, particularly techniques co-opted from other fields that can be applied to endocrine problems.
In an attempt to shepherd the next cohort of young reviewers into the review process, we will encourage our editorial board members to enlist young investigators in the review process, mentoring them in reviewing before they assume the task solo. We are hoping to be more consistent in ensuring that statements of findings are supported by appropriate statistical tests. Finally, we will continue to attempt to protect our readers from ethical transgressions, both intentional and unwitting. While we would prefer not to think about these, ethical problems are either increasing or perhaps becoming more public. We will make every effort to keep the science that we publish honest and to fill our volumes with only the best repeatable research.
Thanks to the 5-year-old electronic review process, we have a very short time to decision and online publication. Because this and (rightly or wrongly) our impact factor are two of the primary reasons why our colleagues choose to send us their best work, we will continue to make both high priorities while maintaining the high quality of the journal. With the continued support of our editorial board and reviewers who take time out of their busy day to provide rapid and competent reviews and strong support from The Endocrine Society, we will continue to provide quick decisions on your manuscripts
Finally, we will continue to seek out the strongest endocrine research, and in a tradition that traces back to the first editor of Endocrinology, we will continue to support publication of work that is integrative, spanning multiple areas or levels of investigation. I am excited to be part of an era of an unprecedented rate of discovery in Endocrinology. I look forward to working with the editors, editorial board, authors, reviewers, and The Endocrine Society during the next 5 years to help make Endocrinology even better than it is today.
Received October 31, 2007.
Accepted for publication November 1, 2007.
 |
References |
|---|
 Top References |
|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Endocrinology | Endocrine Reviews | J. Clin. End. & Metab. |
| Molecular Endocrinology | Recent Prog. Horm. Res. | All Endocrine Journals |
