Challenges and successes in the leadership of reviews of geophysics

Editors Vox Blog of AGU's Publications Department.

In January 2018, I took over as Editor-in-Chief Reviews of Geophysics (ROG), and I have to say that the experience I gained was invaluable. It is a position of great responsibility within our society, and I approach it with a deep sense of duty and responsibility.

My primary goal is to uphold and enhance the magazine's respected reputation, working closely with the Editorial Board to ensure the continuation of the exceptional work of previous Editor-in-Chief Mark Moltwin.

A editorial, we have laid out our view on what constitutes a comprehensive research paper. Since then, and throughout my tenure as Headmaster, we have worked closely with teachers to realize this vision.

We have built a strong and diverse faculty with a focus on gender and geographic diversity. We implemented a comprehensive overhaul of the editorial process and introduced a new approach to evaluating submitted contributions, as highlighted in our latest editorial.60 years and beyond Reviews of Geophysics”. Beyond the historical aspect of that editorial, what each writer wants to submit to an article is crucial. Reviews of Geophysics Because, in simple and very clear terms, it explains how a proposal and then a submitted essay should be structured.

Over the years, we have invited the best comprehensive research papers in various fields in the Earth and Space Sciences. Notably, these efforts led to a substantial increase in all journals Measurements (eg JIF =25.2; CiteScore = 47.2; Journal Citing = 2.5) and readership.

I strongly believe that review papers should go beyond summaries of existing literature and avoid presenting unpublished data. Instead, they should serve as essential guides, providing an essential context for ongoing research efforts and future perspectives. These papers should provide a framework that enables a deeper understanding of processes, developments, challenges and interrelationships across different communities, observations, models and methodologies.

By providing this broad perspective, research papers not only become invaluable resources for researchers, but also stimulate new ideas and avenues for future research. Rather than reiterating existing research, review articles should challenge readers to think critically and push the boundaries of current knowledge.

Creating such documents is undoubtedly a challenging endeavor that requires a deep understanding of the field and a willingness to engage with diverse ideas and perspectives. Nevertheless, we believe that the benefits of such efforts are immeasurable. By striving to produce effective review papers, we contribute significantly to the advancement of our fields and play an important role in shaping the future of research.

when Reviews of Geophysics First established in February 1963, the landscape of magazines and publications is very diverse. Since then, there has been a significant increase in the number of journals and publications available. Magazines like RoG are critical to the future of science. As knowledge rapidly expands and diversifies, access to studies that provide a current and comprehensive view is essential. It is particularly useful for emerging researchers entering the field as well as established researchers who want to keep abreast of the latest developments in geophysics. That is why RoG Focuses on a wide range of important topics in an easy to understand format. It also tries to include ideas on what future research might look like. For articles published in RoG The main goal should be to add a lot of value to the changing world of science.

Thanks You!

I owe a great deal to my fellow teachers, both present and past, whom we have guided collectively. Reviews of Geophysics to its position as a leading journal in the earth and space science community. Their contribution is fundamental to the magazine's growth and success.

I would like to thank: Valerio Acocella, Robert Bingham, Emily Brodsky, Annemarie Carlton, Kate Chen, Michael Crucifix, Paolo D'Otorico, Qingyun Duan, Andrew Gettelman, Jasper Halegas, Ruth Harris, Tomo Katsura, Mark M. Gesine Mollenhauer, Greg S. Okin, Thomas H. Painter, Alan Robock, Eelco Rohling, Claudine Stirling, and Yusuke Yokoyama.

Finally, thanks to the AGU Publications staff, past and present, all who have been instrumental in this editorial journey: Sarah Detage, Julie Dixon, Matthew Giampola, Lorraine Hall-Betty, Brooks Hanson, Sophie Hanson, Jenny Lunn, Marilyn Meadows, Chris Micucci, Jeanette Banning. , Mia Ritchie, Brian Chedora, Randy Townsend, Paige Wooden and Wenboy Yang.

I would like to welcome the newly appointed Principal, Qingyun Duan. I have full confidence in his leadership and ability to further advance the role and reputation of the Journal.

—Fabio Florindo ([email protected]; 0000-0002-6058-9748), National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology, Italy

Learn more about incoming editor-in-chief, Qingyun Duan.

Quote: Florinto, F. (2024), Challenges and Successes in the Leadership of Reviews in Geophysics, EOS, 105, https://doi.org/10.1029/2024EO245009. Published on 23 February 2024.

This article does not reflect the opinion of AGU, Eos, or any of its subsidiaries. This is the author's opinion only.

Text © 2024. Authors. CC BY-NC-ND 3.0
Unless otherwise noted, images are subject to copyright. Any reuse is prohibited without the express permission of the copyright owner.

related to