Editorial

Everything changes and nothing is constanti Robert Forrest

I am writing this editorial on 21st December, the shortest day of the year in the northern hemisphere, the winter solstice, Winterset or Yule. Call it what you will, it is a time when change is in the air and is also a time to look forward, even though the worst of the winter is to come. This year that is particularly true of at least two of the major forensic science Journals. The Journal of Forensic Science is changing its publisher and Science and Justice will have a new editor with effect from the next issue. It is a useful time to take stock and ask some questions about what the purpose of a journal aimed at forensic science practitioners is and, more to the point, what that purpose should be.

Jones, in the first paper of this edition of the Journal, analyses the citation record of papers published in the Journal of Forensic Science. It is hardly surprising that he identifies papers dealing with the forensic uses of DNA technology as being those which are most highly cited. One might argue that this implies that a forensic science journal editor who wishes to enhance the impact factor of her journal should aim to publish as many (high quality) papers on DNA technology as possible. This argument is only valid if the sole function of the journal is the self referential one of enhancing its impact factor. For an editor to take the decision to publish a paper, after peer review, by looking only at the effect that that paper may have on his journal's impact factor is inappropriate. One might argue that it is as inappropriate as a decision by a university to divest itself of its department of forensic pathology, academic forensic pathologists in the UK having to spend more time in practice than they do in writing grant applications, in order to enhance the Faculty of Medicine's Research Assessment Exercise Rating. Just as the function of a university in the UK is, or ought to be, wider than chasing a Research Assessment Exercise rating, so the function of a forensic science journal ought to be more than to simply chase a high impact factor. The publications of relevant papers that influence practice will be positively reflected in the impact factor, but it is the publication of papers that influence and help practitioners in a particular discipline and inform practitioners in other disciplines, and those who commission forensic science services, of cutting edge developments that the editor should be aiming to attract and publish. Any consequential enhancement of the impact factor is merely an epiphenomenon.

General review papers also have a vital function; they are used as sources by students, who should, of course, always be encouraged to look beyond the review to the primary source material. They can also help managers, lawyers and perhaps even legislators to reach a better understanding of difficult issues. A good, recent,

example of such a review is one by Jones describing the Swedish experience of a zero tolerance regimen for the presence of illicit drugs in drivers' blood. [ l ] One can predict that this review will be read by many practitioners, hopefully read by policy makers, probably in abstract, and will certainly be widely cited.

The publication of book reviews remains an important journal function even in the age of the World Wide Web. As budgets and even personal incomes shrink the question as to whether or not a particular book is worth buying for oneself or one's department becomes more focused. The on-line blurb on the booksellers' website may not be helpful and the opportunity to thumb through a dead tree copy of a highly specialised tome at a real bookshop, even in a university city, so as to be able to make an informed buying decision, may simply not be there. A crisp, critical and well informed book review in a specialist journal is invaluable in informing the decision to purchase or not to purchase an expensive book.

One of the properties that a journal needs to fulfil its functions is accessibility. Today that means accessibility over the Internet. Simply having abstracts selected by National Library of Medicine reviewers available through a medline search is no longer good enough. If a scientist wants to refer to a key paper then there is no substitute for having the paper itself downloaded to her desktop in the same format as it was published in the journal. At present, this is an area in which Science and Justice is sadly deficient. It is a fa- cility that the Journal must offer to its subscribers if it is to remain competitive and it is not something that the Forensic Science So- ciety can offer within its own resources. This means that one of the most important jobs of the next editor will be to navigate through the shoals inherent in developing a partnership with one of the major publishers for the publication of the journal, with all the added value for members of the Society and journal subscribers that this will bring. I wish her luck; it will probably be the most important change in the Journal's history. It is something that will certainly enhance the utility of the journal to its readers and will make it more attractive to potential authors. A time of change indeed. Onward and upward ... I hand over the reins to Dr Niamh Nic Daeid with all best wishes for the fascinating task ahead.

1. Jones A. Driving Under the Influence of Drugs In Sweden with Zero Concentration Limits In Blood For Controlled Sub- stances. Traffic Injury Prevention. 2005 December 2005;8:317- 22.

' n c r u r a pel KCXI OU&EV j ~ e u e l Heracletus of Ephesus (c. 5 3 5 4 7 5 BCE).

science&justice Volume 45 NO. 4 (2005) I 73 Page 173