Skip to Main Content
Comments in defense of symposia proceedings: Response to Bart and AndersonAuthor(s): Deborah M. Finch; A. Lorin Ward; R. H. Hamre
Source: Wildlife Society Bulletin. 10(2): 181-183.
Publication Series: Miscellaneous Publication
PDF: View PDF (132.32 KB)
DescriptionA 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.
- You may send email to firstname.lastname@example.org to request a hard copy of this publication.
- (Please specify exactly which publication you are requesting and your mailing address.)
CitationFinch, 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.
Keywordssymposia proceedings, technology transfer
- In my experience: quality control of symposia and their published proceedings
- Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: Ninth World Wilderness Congress symposium; November 6-13, 2009; Merida, Yucatan, Mexico
- Nondestructive Testing and Evaluation of Wood—50 Years of Research: International Nondestructive Testing and Evaluation of Wood Symposium Series
XML: View XML