Laura Mariani (@laur… on Wikibombing with Emory’s… emorycentralsulcus on Wikibombing with Emory’s… Nicky Penttila on Wikibombing with Emory’s… Wikibombing with Emo… on Wikibombing with Emory’s… Andy Rasbergur on NeuroLaffs: Dec 2014
- Book Reviews
- Career & Skills Development
- Emory Community
- Executive Committee
- Faculty Spotlight
- field report
- journal article
- Local Field Potential
- Neuroscience Program
- Philosopher's Corner
- Postdoc Spotlight
- Scientific Interest
- Student Spotlight
- The Printables
- Wacky Science
Tagsaccomplishments activities Alex Poplawsky Amielle Moreno Amy Mahan annoucements announcements answers archives art Atlanta awards book review brain awareness Brittany Howell career career development Cliff Michaels comics crossword Dan Manvich David Ehrlich Don Noble Drew Solyst drinks emory community Eric Maltbie Erin Hecht EWIN Executive Committee faculty faculty interview faculty spotlight food frontiers fun GIN incoming Jacob Billings James Burkett Kara Kittelberger Laura Mariani Leah Anderson Leah Roesch Lizabeth Martin local field potential Lucy Guillory mascot Meera Modi music neuroethics Neuroscience program outgoing outreach philosopher's corner philosophy postdoc recruitment retreat Sara Freeman scientific interest SFN skills development spotlight student spotlight sudoku teaching The Printables thesis Todd Ahern Tom Hennessey Tyra Lamar wacky science welcome Yvonne Ogbonmwan
Outstanding Scientific Achievement: Kelly Lohr
Outstanding Early Achievement: Maria Briscione
Scientific Outreach: Carlie Hoffman
University Service: Natty Chalermpalanupap
Leadership: Ashley Sullivan
Excellence in Teaching: Karl Schmidt
Excellence in Mentorship: Zachary Johnson
GIN Faculty of the Year: Malu Tansey
GIN Service Award: Maylen Perez Diaz
Director’s Impact Award: Machelle Pardue
Director’s Unsung Hero Award: Don Noble
Excellence in Service: Gary Longstreet
By Ben Kuebrich, More writing from Ben can be found on his blog Neuroamer on WordPress.
Edited by Amielle Moreno
(If you’re a podcast convert and I’m preaching to the choir feel free to skip ahead to my list of the best neuroscience and behavior podcasts. If you’re new to podcasts and interested in getting started, here’s my advice:)
Hello, my name is Ben and I’m a podcast addict. I can’t remember when I started using, but I know that I can’t stop. Perhaps it’s genetic or environmental – my mom listened to books on tape and I spent my formative years over-hearing these tapes as she did household chores (is there a sensitive period for podcast dependency?).
I love music, but more and more it’s familiar voices sped up to chipmunk speeds that are emanating from my earbuds. So as much as it pains me to admit my mom is right about anything, I think she was onto something – audiobooks and podcasts are the way of the future.
- Podcasts ‘a neologism and portmanteau derived from “broadcast” and “pod” from the success of the iPod,’ are episodic series that can be streamed from mobile devices like smartphones, so no advanced planning is required: (The best podcast apps seem to be Podcast Addict for android and Overcast for iPhones.) Additionally you can stream them from your computer, or download podcast episodes using iTunes., If you subscribe to a podcast, it will update itself by automatically downloading new episodes when they’re released.
- Podcasts are a great way to multitask during mindless talks, commutes, and exercise: They were a life-saver when I worked as a research tech and spent long hours moving mutated mice from shit-covered cage to shit-covered cage in a soulless basement apartment the day after Christmas in freezing Boston.
- Podcasts are an efficient way to take in information: You can control the audio speed, easily pause to take notes, and rewind if you’ve spaced out.
I use the android podcast app Podcast Addict, which has built-in control over the speed. Normally, I’ll speed up podcasts and listen to them as fast as I can get away with (starting slow at 1.2-1.3x but sometimes going as high as 2.5x to give slow drawlers the pressured speech of a manic chipmunk). Comedy is all about timing, but relative timing, and sped-up comedy if anything seems wittier and funnier, and in general everyone makes everyone seem smarter?
- Podcasts are popular: You may have heard of the NPR podcast, and This American Life spinoff, and whodunnit murder mystery ‘Serial.’ A surprise success, in December 2014 Serial brought national attention to podcasts. More than just a news story about a murder mystery, NPR producers took advantage of a unique aspect of the podcast medium. The murder mystery explored in Serial was too long and complicated for a single radio episode. With flexible episode lengths, embedded links to supplementary material in the show notes, and real time releasing of episodes as the journalism unfolded, the end result was a completely binge-able story, unlike anything that could be released on radio or audiobook, and even elicited an NPR spoof:
- Podcasts can provide in depth coverage: Unconstrained by schedules, podcasts can vary in length and often go on the longer side, some last as long as 3 or 4 hours. This allows for real in-depth interviews with thinkers and celebrities that you’ll never hear on a late-night talk show.
- Podcasts democratize audio as anyone can release one: If you’d be interested in starting an Emory Neuroscience podcast, please hit me up.
So without further ado, here are my…
TOP NEUROSCIENCE PODCASTS
In rough order of sciency-ness and relevance to grad students, these picks are apples and oranges (and in one case an apple-orange). These podcasts can be a great way to hear how scientists talk and think, to get exposed to a variety of topics, and to keep up-to-date with this quickly moving field.
- UTSA’s Neuroscientist’s Talk Shop: As the name implies, NTS is hardcore neuroscience. It’s off-the-record-like speculation, on-the-record. Each episode has an invited guest who takes part in an informal discussion and answers questions posed by other neuroscientists, including my P.I. Sam Sober,and other familiar faces like Lena Ting and (early adopter back in 2011) Dieter Jaeger. Generally, the topics covered focus on computational neuroscience and electrophysiology. Often speakers assume listeners are well versed in the field, but even if you aren’t, you get a lot out of it by hearing the way scientists think, talk, and speculate on the gray areas of neuroscience. Frequency: varies 1-3 weeks during the school year ~45 min. Target Audience: Grad Student +
- High Proof Podcast: A podcast with a sense of humor, their tagline reads: “We demand high proof for our science and our spirits.” Two Graduate students, Ryan and Joel, pick interesting topics and I especially like the philosophical slant, though I wish they spent more time explain the background of the philosophy they cover. They could plan and research their topics a little better, but I also don’t want them to sacrifice the conversational tone. Frequency: ~1/wk 12 episodes total as I write this. Target Audience: Undergraduates, Grad Students
- Neuropod: Nature’s official neuroscience podcast hosted by neuroscience journalist Elie Dolgin. Each episode is around a half hour and usually features 3-4 interviews on recent publications and reviews, this podcast is a great way to keep abreast of new research and show off during lab meeting. The website also has links to the papers if they peak your interest. The podcast has high production value on par with public radio. Frequency: Monthly episodes ~30 min. Target Audience: Undergraduates, Grad Students
- Brain Science Podcast: “The show for everyone who has a brain.” Hosted by an ER doctor with a background in research and engineering, Ginger Campbell, she does a huge service to the world by getting big name neuroscientists to talk in depth while keeping things accessible. It’s great for getting introduced to perspectives on neuropsychology. I also love that Dr. Campbell repeats and clarifies important points in the middle and end of episodes and always asks the guests to give advice to students. The website also features annotated transcripts of the episodes. Frequency: Monthly episodes ~1 hr. Target Audience: Undergraduates, Grad Students, Your Mom (Seriously. No, seriously tell your mom to listen to this and maybe she’ll stop asking you so many annoying questions about what you do.) (Mom if you ever read this, I’m joking around.)
- Naked Neuroscience Podcast: A podcast recorded out of Cambridge University, this podcast has been around since 2001, but it’s new to me! This podcast includes news from European conferences and interviews with scientists from around the world. It has high production values, good stories, rigorous science, but as you can see from the picture a sense of humor as well. Frequency: Monthly episodes ~30 mins. Target Audience: Anyone interested in neurosciene with a sense of humor.
- NPR’s Invisibilia: Think Radiolab focused on “the invisible forces that control human behavior – ideas, beliefs, assumptions and emotions.” Hosted by rising stars Lulu Miller and Alix Spiegel, in each episode they interview scientists and craft small narratives around themes. For example, this season featured episodes on interactions with technology, blindness, and fear. The first season is 6 episodes, ~1 hr, more to come and hopefully soon! Target Audience: People who need something to talk about at cocktail parties.
- Freakonomics: “The hidden side of everything.” Hosted by the authors of the best-selling book of the same name, Freakanomics Radio podcast has released over 200 episodes since 2010. The show uses a narrative style and interviews to explain studies of behavioral economics–a field that uses economic statistical techniques and theory to determine what factor-like incentives drive the behavior of people and systems. Incredibly interesting and accessible, it doesn’t touch strictly on neuroscience, yet I would recommend it to any human being interested in behavior and decision-making. Frequency: 1/wk 30-60 mins. Target Audience: People who like to show off at cocktail parties.
- The Laughter Research Podcast: The guests of this podcast include not only professors, but comedians and entrepreneurs. This broader perspective is in part due to the host Glen Duggan. He’s a non-traditional psychology PhD candidate in Trinity College, Dublin, with a lot of real world experience. We briefly chatted on twitter and he seems like a genuinely great guy. Positive emotions like happiness and behaviors like laughter can be understudied compared to negative emotions, so the work he’s doing is very important. Frequency: ~ 2 episodes / month Target Audience: Lay people.
- All about Autism Podcast: If you’re interested in psychiatric disease or autism, this niche podcast is a fascinating and easy listen. This podcast is co-hosted by Heather and Dave Eaton, the co-owners and co-founders of Eaton Alliance Inc., which supports individuals with disabilities, specializing in autism. You get to hear a less academic, but extremely well informed perspective on autism. In some ways these hosts are far more informed than most academics as to the everyday lives of patients. A powerful force for good in the world right now, this podcast educates and rebuffs the misconception that vaccines cause autism. (To repeat the obvious, there is no scientific evidence showing vaccines cause autism and many have looked. The one original study that did show this has been shown to be a fraud propagated by a scientist with a conflict of interest.) Frequency: Used to be once a week, but now closer to once a month. Target Audience: anyone interested in science communication and a patient’s perspective.
- Talking Machines: “Human Conversation about Machine Learning” – A machine-learning podcast, but I think that a lot of neuronal learning is going to resemble machine learning. Anyways, it’s probably good knowledge to have, seeing as we’re on the precipice of another industrial-revolution with machine learning that will put a lot of white-collar workers out of business, or living in a simulation created by ‘a hypothetical, but inevitable, singular ultimate superintelligence may punish those who fail to help it or help create it.’ See, I learn useless junk by listening to podcasts!
As I mentioned above, I’m a podcast addict, so I’d love to hear what you’re listening to and what you’d recommend, even podcasts that aren’t directly related to neuroscience and behavior. Also, if you liked this post and want to see more like it please share it. If you want updates on what I’m thinking and listening to please follow me on twitter, or like the Neuroamer page on facebook.
Non-neuroscience podcasts that I think are worth checking out: Radio Lab, This American Life, Planet Money, Fresh Air, 60 Minutes Pop Culture Happy Hour, DVDASA, Monday Morning Podcast with Bill Burr, Harmontown, Judge John Hodgman Podcast, Human Conversation, Nature Podcast, Science Podcast, New Yorker Fiction, Yoshi Didn’t, Science Friday, Song Exploder, Startup Podcast, 4 Hour Work Week Podcast, Joe Rogan Podcast, Duncan Trussel Family Hour Podcast, Smartest Man in the World w/ Greg Proops, The Nerdist, This Feels Terrible, Upvoted, WTF with Marc Maron, Yale Humanities, You Made it Weird.
This article was originally published by Inscripto Magzine, produced by the Science Writers Association of Emory and republished with permission. Check out articles by other neuroscience students in the new Spring 2015 issue.
Any wilderness expert will tell you the most dangerous animal to see in the wild is a baby bear. Accidentally stumbling between a mother bear and her cubs is a sure way to get mauled. Mothers will do anything for their children and none of us would be here today if it wasn’t for the selflessness of our ancestors, putting the survival of their offspring sometimes before themselves.
So apparently, the most basic drive for self-preservation can be trumped by babies. While we can’t live forever, we can pass on our genes. Thus, what Richard Dawkins termed “selfish genes” have created animals built for their own survival, and that drive for self-preservation can be redirected to reproduction and then parental care.
The Power of Hormones
I’m sorry to be the one to tell you this, but the areas of your brain responsible for decision-making can be overpowered by hormone-driven signals from deeper brain regions. During development, hormones influence the structure of our bodies, including our brains. During puberty, the same hormones can act again on these existing systems to make you feel awkward during gym class. But perhaps the largest natural shift in hormone concentrations is during pregnancy.
The milieu of hormones pregnant women experience can make long-lasting structural changes to the neurons in our brain. The neurons in deep brain regions responsible for maternal behavior can grow in size when exposed to pregnancy hormones such as estrogens. So, the same time motherhood occurs, the brain is experiencing significant changes. The growing neurons start to communicate with areas of the brain that make the signaling molecule dopamine.
Dopamine rules what neuroscientists call “the reward pathway” and it’s the reason you like anything… ever… in your entire life. Your body releases this magical molecule when you perform activities that will keep you and your genes alive and spreading. Dopamine is released while consuming food or having sex, and because your genes want to be passed on, the drive for parental care relies on this reward pathway too. Large doses of estrogen, such as those occurring during late stages of pregnancy and labor trigger the release of dopamine, stimulating the reward system. This makes new mothers primed and ready to love that 7 pound 5 ounce screaming, floppy pile of responsibility, you named “Aden.”
Hormones lead to new and permanent changes in brain circuitry, which is how areas of the brain interact and respond to one another’s activity. Perhaps surprisingly, animals that haven’t been around babies are not initially fond of infants. Virgin, pup-inexperienced female mice have a natural avoidance to infant stimuli, which is not completely unreasonable. Think about what a baby would seem like if you didn’t know what it was: they cry for seemingly no reason, smell, and demand a lot of time, money and attention. In mice, researchers have explored a natural avoidance and defensive response associated with animals that are new to infant care. There are defined circuits in the brain responsible for this avoidance response. The hormones of pregnancy, silence this circuit, and neural circuits responsible for maternal responses can then be more active.
Changes in Behavior
You might have heard from your friendly neighborhood neuroscientist you don’t have free will. Let me reassure you that yes, you’re a slave to the power of babies. The immediate changes in a mom’s behavior after childbirth suggest major changes are occurring in brain circuitry. This new baby addiction or “sensitization” is caused by changes in the reward system’s dopamine release. Cocaine and other addictive drugs trigger the reward system and release dopamine throughout the brain. Like a drug, the allure of babies is so strong that when given the choice, rats with maternal experience prefer to enter a room associated with infant pups over associated with cocaine. Using this knowledge, let’s take care of two societal problems at once: “Orphanages: The New Methadone Clinic!”
Sensitization causes mothers to act differently. Mother rodents show increases in risk-taking behavior. For example, mother mice on an elevated maze with enclosed and open arms, will spend more time exploring the potentially dangerous open arms than virgin mice. On the up side, new mothers display increases in memory. In a maze, mother rats were better than virgins at remembering where the food was and were faster to retrieve it. The researchers concluded that improved foraging memory increases the chance of survival for a mother’s pups. If this held true in humans, the concept of “baby brain” might be unfounded. However, funding cuts have halted the construction of the human-sized maze stocked with baby supplies.
Even abstaining from motherhood won’t save you from becoming a slave to baby overlords. Mere exposure to infants can activate changes in the brain regions responsible for maternal behavior, and start the process of sensitization in rodents. The process does take more exposure time than in natural mothers, without the surge of hormones to speed things along. This suggests that women become “baby crazy” by exposure to infant stimuli. While we all might inherently be ambivalent or avoid infants, through exposure to babies, they become conditioned and highly rewarding stimuli. Do you want kids? Then it might already be too late.
Not being female won’t save you either. A study looking at brain activity using an fMRI machine found that when fathers are shown images of their children, they display similar brain activity as mothers. Recent research out of Emory made headlines when it found this increase in activity in the reward pathway was inversely correlated with testes size, and blood testosterone concentration. The conclusion: more parental care equals less testosterone and smaller balls, fellas!
The combination of a higher consciousness and a desire to reproduce means, unlike other animals, humans are presented with the question of if we should reproduce. However, the reason they instruct you on airplanes to put the air mask on yourself before you assist young children is because the human drive to protect our genes, I mean, children, sometimes overrides logic. There’s also an illogical drive to have our own children. In a planet with millions of orphan children, you would assume that the baby-loving masses (and cocaine addicts) would decrease the supply of foster kids overnight. However, our biological nature has a way of convincing humans that we don’t just want a child, but we want our child.
In a modern environment where motherhood is a choice, it’s illogical for anyone to be pressured to give birth to an eighteen-year commitment. Because not all people (or laboratory animals) naturally become sensitized to infants, it might be better for everyone if people who don’t want children aren’t pressured to have them. By simply understanding the literally mind-altering process of parenthood, individuals can make decisions that benefit everyone, including our baby overlords.
This article was originally published by Inscripto Magzine, produced by the Science Writers Association of Emory. Written by Emory graduate students for the public at large, this organization helping to support science communication. To find more articles written by members of Emory’s Neuroscience program and other students on a range of science topics, please peruse their new Spring 2015 issue. Direct link to this article at here.
We gathered at midday. It was unseasonably hot, the sun beating down uncomfortably on our backs as we put on our gear. We barely noticed the sweat soaking through. We were there for a purpose. We knew what needed to be done.
Dexter “The Cannon” Myrick was the first to get hit. It was his trigger hand—a costly loss. But he wouldn’t be the last to see the angry red welts rising on his skin, to fight on through the pain. None of us made it through unscathed. My own injuries have yet to heal. Perhaps they will remain with me always.
We got separated almost immediately. I found myself with Sweet Tea, hunkered down behind a wooden wall that suddenly seemed too thin to hide me from the enemy’s onslaught. We aren’t going to help our team by hiding, she told me. We have to move on. And with a sudden lunge and a tuck and roll, Sweet Tea abandoned me. I am not proud to say it, but I was too scared to move, too scared to fight back.
We were not without heroism. I will never forget watching He Who Shall Not Be (Nick) Named O’Flaherty weaving through enemy fire, reaching our target and raising that beautiful flag that let our enemies know that we will not yield. His family should know that he perished with honor. Nor will I forget watching Phil “The Price is Righteous” Price take a hit for Pork B’Ellie, going down with such bravery and selflessness. Pork B’Ellie honored his death as she bellowed out a war cry and landed a headshot on her aggressor. We fought our way through that abandoned town, hiding behind cars, abandoned buildings, even headstones to press on. We left that battlefield bruised, battered, and covered in paint. Most importantly, we left that battlefield triumphant. We came as friends with nothing but a groupon and a free Sunday afternoon, but we left as warriors, comrades in arms, victors.
Classic Paintball features 5 playing fields and a large urban city to accommodate both recreational and advanced players. They have covered pavilions and picnic tables in the staging area that are provided for you convenience. The fields are open Saturday and Sunday 10:00am-5:00pm.
1320 Blairs Bridge Rd.
Lithia Springs, GA 30122
One of the highlights of this year’s Atlanta Science Festival (held March 21-28) is sure to be the Science of Beer series, sponsored by Georgia Bio and organized by our very own Neuroscience Graduate Program alum, Dr. Jacob Shreckengost (affectionately referred to as Dr. Cupcake by those in the know). This two-part event will encompass exciting talks, tours, interactive demos, and surprise!… plenty of beer to make you forget everything you’ve learned and come back next year!
Each event consists of a brief lecture and several activities designed to fully immerse you in the theme of the day. In both cases, you will hear from scientists and brewers, taste some of the relevant beers, tour the brewery, and explore interactive demos on the science of beer.
Part I on Monday, March 23rd from 6:30-8:30 @ Orpheus Brewing: The first Talk, Tasting, and Tour (modeled after former presidential candidate Herman Cain’s T-T-T plan) will focus on discovering the biology of bacterial fermentation and its role in making certain beers sour. The lecture, given by Dr. Chris Cornelison of Georgia State University, will explore the bacterial processes that give your favorite farmhouse ale and saisons just the right amount of funk, and will be accompanied by beer pairings crafted by Orpheus Brewing. After the talk and discussion, participants will have the opportunity to take tours, view and participate in demos on the science of beer, and mingle with fellow beer nerds and novices. Tickets are available here.
Part II on Wednesday, March 25th from 6:30-8:30 @ Monday Night Brewing: The second event will focus on discovering the neuroscience of taste and how the brain experiences hoppiness. The lecture, given by Emory’s Dr. Kerry Ressler, is titled “From the Brain to the Bulb: How Your Head Handles Hops”, and will explore the neuroscience of taste and how the brain experiences the floral, citrusy and piney bouquets of different hop varieties. It will be accompanied by beer pairings crafted by Monday Night Brewing. Again, after the talk and discussion, participants will have the opportunity to take tours, view and participate in demos on the science of beer, and mingle with fellow beer nerds and novices. Tickets are available here.
If you don’t pass out trying to drink Jacob under the table, you’ll leave with a greater appreciation for the expanding and innovating scientific and brewing community in Atlanta, as well as a collectible Atlanta Science Festival Science of Beer 400mL beaker/pint glass.
Look forward to seeing you there!
Tickets to the event can be purchased below:
Orpheus Brewing: 1440 Dutch Valley Pl NE, Atlanta, GA 30324
Monday Night Brewing: 678 Trabert Ave., Atlanta, 30318
When I first learned to juggle, my teacher, a man whose workouts consisted of running for miles while juggling which he called “joggling,” told me that juggling changes your brain and gives you more gray matter. This meant pretty much nothing to me at the time, but it wouldn’t be the first time neuroscience and juggling collided in my life.
While I was visiting Emory for recruitment, I told some students that I liked to juggle for what I’m sure were totally relevant reasons. During a break between interviews, I was asked to prove it, and while juggling some squishy tangerines, one of my hosts (who has since graduated) decided to chuck a couple more tangerines at me for what I’m sure were equally sound reasons. The tangerines exploded all over my interview clothes, and for the rest of the weekend I was known as the recruit who Dave threw an orange at.
My teacher had only gotten it partially right about juggling and gray matter; a lot of things change our gray matter. The interesting thing about juggling is that it was the exercise used to show long term changes in white matter for the first time in a paper by Heidi Johansen-Berg in Nature Neuroscience in 2009. Twenty four adults were given a six-week course in juggling, and then made to quit their new skill for four weeks. Diffusor Tensor Imaging (DTI) was performed before and after their training, and then again after their juggling abstinence, and it was found their white matter increased after training and stayed increased during juggling prohibition. The regions that were affected are involved in arm movement, grasping, and peripheral vision, which makes sense, but interestingly the magnitude of changes had no relation to the level of skill reached. Juggling enthusiasts have since used this paper to claim that juggling makes you smarter, sharpens concentration, and can prevent neurodegenerative diseases, though it’s hard to take anything seriously from people who literally run five miles a day through forests while juggling.
I personally believe that juggling was responsible for my admission to Emory, though probably not because it enhanced my brain connectivity. I just think getting pummeled with rotten fruit during interviews makes one memorable and leaves a favorable impression. But if anyone wants to increase their gray AND white matter, I can teach you to juggle and promise not to throw any fruit at you.
by Laura Mariani
We all love to roll our eyes at stories of undergrads trying to cite Wikipedia (or in one memorable case from a class I taught: copy and paste from Wikipedia, without even bothering to make the font match the rest of their paper). We also know that without Wikipedia, we’d be so screwed. Whether you’re looking up obscure science terms that no one bothers to define in their journal articles, or just killing time during an incubation by reading about weird animals (ocean sunfish don’t have tails and must swim by “waggling their anal fins”), Wikipedia is an important source of information. But it can always be made better.
Why edit Wikipedia?
Since Wikipedia is a public resource, editing Wikipedia can be viewed as a form of public outreach. In fact, the Society for Neuroscience has previously offered a professional development workshop on writing for Wikipedia. Furthermore, it seems only fair to contribute to a resource that you personally use. If you always ignore the annoying banner ads that pop up during Wikipedia’s fundraising drives, consider donating some of your time instead. As a scientist, you have a combination of expert knowledge and obsessive interest in an obscure topic that make for the best kind of Wikipedia editor.
One serious issue with Wikipedia is that it is a total boys’ club. Somewhere between 84% and 91% of Wikipedia’s volunteer editors are men. This gender disparity behind the scenes leads to many forms of bias, which, while not necessarily intentional, lead to an under-representation of women on Wikipedia’s digital pages. With that in mind, Emory Women in Neuroscience (EWIN) took to the internet on February 27 to increase the number of women scientists featured on the 7th most popular website in the world. At the time of our event, there were only 37 names linked from the “Women neuroscientists” category. As of this writing, the tally is at 93. We made progress, but there’s still plenty of work to be done.
How you can help
Three ways to improve women neuroscientists’ representation on Wikipedia: 1) linking existing articles to the “Women neuroscientists” category (to make them easier to find), 2) adding more information and citations to existing articles about women scientists, and 3) creating new articles about notable women who don’t yet have their own page. These tasks were organized into a public spreadsheet so that anyone, whether or not they were able to attend the EWIN event, can see the work that needs to be done and chip in. With help from Sarah Melton, a PhD candidate in the Institute of the Liberal Arts and Digital Projects Coordinator for the Emory Center for Digital Scholarship, EWIN members learned the basics of how to edit a Wikipedia page and got to work.
EWIN’s to-do spreadsheet is still live, and we could use your help! Here are some things that you can do right now to help us build a better public reference for people interested in neuroscience:
- Add women scientists to our spread sheet. Identify notable women scientists who should be on Wikipedia, or who are on Wikipedia but who have crappy articles, and add their names to our spreadsheet. Wikipedia does use certain notability criteria, so we are not able to create pages for all of the scientists on our list… yet. But if you add someone, we will look into it!
- Edit the pages listed in the spreadsheet under “Scientists whose articles need improving.” This is easier than writing a brand new article and sometimes can be as simple as adding a few references. To cite a journal article, use the “cite journal” template under the “Cite” menu on the Wikipedia editing page. Just enter the PubMed PMID, click the magnifying glass icon, and it will autocomplete the rest of the citation! Wikipedia is officially better at citation management than me.
- Dive in and write a whole article. Anyone highlighted in green under “Scientists w/o articles” has given permission for us to write about them. (We also took the liberty of assuming it’s fine to write about dead people.) I personally tackled a biography of Sue McConnell for this project. It took several hours, split up over a couple of days, but it turned out to be really fun. I learned that in addition to teaching at Stanford and studying cerebral cortex development, Dr. McConnell is a wildlife photographer whose work has been featured in places like National Geographic. I also had the pleasure of contacting her to let her know that she was getting a Wikipedia biography and to request a photograph. It feels really good when a member of the National Academy of Sciences replies to your email with “This is fabulous! Thank you!!!”
Although the Wikipedia interface is not as user-friendly as it could be, there are lots of tutorials available. The “preview” feature also lets you check your edits before publishing them, so it’s possible to empirically determine an optimal editing strategy (aka, randomly try some stuff and then check to see if it worked correctly). Finally, any member of the EWIN executive board should be able to help you out with novice-level Wikipedia questions.
With that in mind, EWIN encourages everybody to participate! EWIN is also planning more group Wikipedia editing sessions (with snacks) for the future, so stay tuned for announcements about that. Happy editing!