Hyatt Regency Hotel
Buffalo, New York, USA

9 May 1996
10:40am - 12:35pm

Attendance:

27 members in attendance; those noted in minutes:

Ed Fine (SUNY at Buffalo: Buffalo, New York, USA)

Stan Finger (Washington University: St. Louis, Missouri, USA)

H. William Gillen (Wilmington, North Carolina, USA)

Sam Greenblatt (Memorial Hospital of Rhode Island: Providence, Rhode Island, USA)

Duane Haines (University of Mississippi: Jackson, Mississippi, USA)

Hansruedi Isler (University Hospital: Zürich, Switzerland)

Steven Jacyna (Wellcome Institute for the History of medicine: London, UK)

Russell Johnson (UCLA: Los Angeles, California, USA)

Peter Koehler (De Wever Hospital: Heerlen, The Netherlands)

Malcolm Macmillan (Deakin University: Burwood, Australia)

Louise Marshall (UCLA: Los Angeles, California, USA)

F. (Frank) Clifford Rose (London Neurological Centre: London, UK)

Rachael Rosner (York University: Toronto, Ontario, Canada)

Chris Smith (Aston University: Birmingham, UK)

Vincent Wan (University of Chicago: Chicago, Illinois, USA)

Harry Whitaker (UQAM: Montreal, Quebec, Canada)

George York (Saa Institute: Fiddletown, California, USA)

1. President's Welcome  (Stan Finger)
   
   SF welcomed meeting attendees and described the Society, its journal, and the editorial board; thanked Duane Haines (Secretary), Sam Greenblatt (Treasurer), and Harry Whitaker and the Program Committee for their assistance.
   
   

2. Secretary's Report  (Duane Haines)
   
   
   • 163 dues-paying members; 10-12 in process
   • 23 countries are represented; 50% from US + Canada; remainder include: Switzerland, Bolivia, Italy, United Kingdom, France, Hong Kong, Austria, Germany, Denmark, Luxembourg, Japan, The Netherlands, etc.
   • ads for the society have been run in IBRO newsletter and Society for Neuroscience newsletter, among others
   • Harry Whitaker offered to run notifications in his 2 journals
   • DH suggests imposing on your friends in the publishing world to run ads; e.g., Wiley Liss will run ad in 147 issues across 19 journals (including 32 times in J. Comp. Neurol.)
   • DH has notice members can send if their contact publisher/editor offers free ad space
   • DH will send out membership list
   • DH asked members to recruit one new member apiece
   • Rachael Rosner raised the point that faculty members and students are balking at the cost. DH noted that of the $95 membership fee, $20 goes to the society, the remainder to the journal. RR asked if people could join without getting the journal. DH responded, not for $20. Harry Whitaker noted that Swets would probably alter their relationship with us if we offered a membership split off from the journal; they expect us to be getting 500 members down the road. Louise Marshall commented that we would have to start a newssheet if there were no journal. DH responded he doesn't want to do a newsletter.
   • Malcolm Macmillan asked if each country or area could have a contact person, with this noted in the membership list.
   • DH asked members to submit papers to the journal.
   • $285 collected at the meeting; 1 new member at the meeting
   • DH announced that Kopf Instrument Company donated $1500; consensus among those present to make Kopf a "Charter Sustaining Member"
   • 1 person from Cuba and 1 from Yugoslavia contacted DH, wanting to be members without paying dues. DH raised the possibility of listing them as "corresponding members" at the end of the membership list. Stan Finger suggested they be given a one year membership in the society, but that they should write to Swets themselves if they want the journal.
   • SF suggested the Secretary and President should write a letter to the membership about the annual meeting, afterwards; suggested it become a policy to send this letter between meetings [no vote taken].
   
   

3. Treasurer's Report  (Sam Greenblatt)
   
   
   • SG submitted Financial Statement, showing activity 14 July 1995 - 31 March 1996.
   • SG occasionally receives notices from bank that checks from Europe are "entered for collection"; unclear why this happens. One wire transfer is unattributed.
   • ISHN has incorporated in the State of Rhode Island; attorneys hold the original papers, SG has copy.
   • SG thanked DH and University of Mississippi for making his job easier.
   
   

4. Report and Discussion on the State of the Journal  (Frank Rose)
   
   
   • SF suggested questions to address: indexing and institutional subscriptions.
   • FR has been addressing some glitches in the changeover of publishers and invites comments.
   • FR proposed topic of discussion: stick to the reference style, at the end of papers?
   • A criticism of the journal has been that it is too clinical. In response to this, FR noted that the journal was started by neurologists and that there is still some backlog; he invited more basic science contributions.
   • FR insisted that the journal needs to review books; members can ask him to get a copy of a book to review.
   • FR has put a description of the journal in an editorial of his that went to 20,000 neurologists.
   • FR reported that Swets is satisfied with the pace of institutional subscriptions.
   • FR suggested that we ask an institution to act as a "parent" for an "orphan" (re: Cuba, Yugoslavia topic)
   • George York suggested that electronic indexing is based on regularity and promptness of publication, and that we need to get indexed on the electronic databases.
   • FR responded that one reason we have not met the criteria GY described is that we recently changed publishers.
   • Harry Whitaker has recently been in touch with Martin Scrivener, our contact at Swets, and reports that they are more eager than we to get the journal indexed.
   • SF asked if the journal will be back-indexed; general agreement is that this is the standard practice.
   • Peter Koehler announced that Martha Chorney is Scrivener's successor; she indicated it would take one or two years to begin indexing, and that we should have good abstracts and recognized keywords.
   • GY said he had talked with Medline (MEDLARS) people 3 years ago and was told we could get the journal fast-tracked in 3 months; he will contact PK about this.
   • FR announced he wants to balance basic and clinical content. He also described format changes in the journal: double columns; 3 issues per year; an increase in number of pages per year by 20%. The backlog will be over in 2 issues.
   • MM raised the question of style of reference for journal articles: adopt a style, or let papers go in with the stylistic requirements of one's discipline for each paper? name, date in body of text, unnumbered references? FR responded we do not have numbered notes, as the historical tradition, at the bottom of the page.
   • Duane Haines asked about a citation style for letters.
   • Vincent Wan noted there is not a good citation for works that have been reprinted. [general discussion ensued.]
   • William Gillen asked what the publisher would like to do. FR responded it is up to us. SF suggested the APA style for reprints, and a reference list citation form for letters (e.g., "Ferrier, letter to Bowditch, date. Collection title.") Rachael Rosner noted it sounds like we are following APA format.
   • harry Whitaker suggested we appoint a 1 or 2 person committee to draw up guidelines, which would appear in journal instructions to contributors. Louise Marshall suggested this belongs as a subcommittee of the editorial Board. FR indicated that he will formulate instructions and send them to the Editorial Board for comment.
   
   

5. Trivia Bowl  (Stan Finger)
   
   
   • SF suggested we continue the Trivia Bowl in the form of questions on one page in each issue of the journal.
   • Motion on SF's proposal. For: 15 votes. Against: 5 votes. Motion passed.
   • Submit entries to Peter Koehler or Stan Finger. Harry Whitaker recommended the entries be refereed or edited. Duane Haines suggested the feature not be called "trivia"; recommended "scholars' corner" or "scholars' space".
   • SF thanked Frank Rose for his work.
   
   

6. Program Committee  (Harry Whitaker)
   
   
   • Stan Finger reported results of a "straw poll" regarding abstracts submitted for the annual meeting:
   • Poll Proposal #1: "Every person who is a member of ISHN should be guaranteed at least one slot on the program (oral or poster presentation). (The alternative is to grant the program committee the power to reject abstracts that are poorly written or say nothing new.)" This proposal was overwhelmingly rejected. The program committee will encourage a submitter to act on an abstract to bring it up to a presentable point.
   • Poll Proposal #2: "Members may not present a paper that has been presented at another conference (even a conference with little overlapping membership) unless the paper has new information or perspective. (The alternative is to leave this decision up to the program committee and to ask submitters whether their paper has been presented previously.)" This proposal received 6 votes in favor and 4 votes against, with concerns about "fuzzy differences" in the last category.

   • Harry Whitaker thanked Rachael Rosner, Sam Greenblatt, and Lauren Harris for evaluating abstracts this year.
   • The committee received 31 submissions: 21 papers appeared on the program, 2-3 withdrew their papers before the meeting, 3 withdrew after the program was decided, and about 5 were turned down by the committee. One person whose paper was turned down wanted to withdraw from the society.

   • Discussion followed, centered not on refereeing papers but on multiple submissions.
   • One submission to ISHN was identical to an abstract already published by the American Academy of Neurology; the decision to reject this submission was made by HW and supported by the program committee.
   • Peter Koehler asked about papers in another language, in another country.
   • HW spoke on international copyright, applying to identical word in identical language; suggested that paper in another language would be okay, but submitter should make reference to the other meeting.
   • Rachael Rosner addressed the role of extending the audience a paper receives, as long as the submitter is honest about where submissions are made.
   • Sam Greenblatt reiterated RR's call for honesty in revealing where and when an abstract was submitted, and the value of multiple venues when there is little overlap of membership.
   • HW indicated he would write a Call for Papers to reflect the discussion, placing disclosure discretion with the Program Committee.
   • [Question from the floor] asked about the situation in which an abstract is submitted before the paper, but the paper is published first.
   • [Question from the floor] asked if we, like the AAN which requires first publication of a paper associated with an abstract at a meeting, would require such a paper to first be submitted to our journal? HW indicated he didn't like that constraint.
   • SF directed HW to send the document [Call for Papers] to the governing board for consideration.
   • [Question from the floor] observed that we are applying a "threshold" judgment now; but as the society expands, will we call for a "quality" judgment? HW replied he hoped we would always take quality abstracts, erring on the side of inclusion; we can expand the length of the meeting or run concurrent sessions.
   • HW thanked the authors and presenters on behalf of the Program Committee.
   • SF observed that the Program Committee [could or would?] ask authors to present as posters if there were not enough time.
   • [Question from the floor] suggested getting invited address(es) at the next meeting, with or without an honorarium. HW suggested we consider naming a presentation for a donor, such as the "Kopf Lecture". PK suggested a lecture named for an historical figure. SF instructed the Program Committee to look into these suggestions. Malcolm Macmillan voiced a reservation about an invited address, warning that it should stay on topic and not be too general.
   
   

7. Leiden 1997  (Peter Koehler)
   
   
   • PK described plans and brochure for the next ISHN meeting, which will be held June 20-2 1997, in Leiden, along with the 6th meeting of the European Club of the History of Neurology (which begins June 18). PK is working on getting sponsors for the meeting. He also wants a social program, perhaps at the Boerhaave Museum, and a reception.
   • 1997 Program Committee: PK, Chris Smith, Paul Eling, Harry Whitaker, and George York.
   • am Greenblatt asked when the Wellcome Aphasia meeting would be; he expressed concerns of those traveling from outside Europe who might want to attend it, too. Steve Jacyna responded that he is working on its timing, for before or after the ISHN meeting.
   
   

8. Site for next North American meeting (1998)  (Stan Finger)
   
   
   • Three sites were nominated in a straw poll distributed before the meeting; members were asked to rank sites from 1-3 (most favored - least favored); the lower the total score, the more favored the site is:
   • Straw Poll results:
     • Los Angeles (with Society for Neuroscience meeting in October): 12 points
     • Toronto (with American Association for the History of Medicine meeting in May): 12 points
     • Montreal: 15 points

   • Harry Whitaker asked, if our meeting were in Los Angeles, would we need to pay the Society for Neuroscience to be "affiliated"? Duane Haines responded that he had checked out this issue earlier with respect to the Cajal Club; it would cost us approximately $12,000 to affiliate our meeting with theirs; otherwise, we would need our own hotel and make all our own arrangements, but the Society for Neuroscience would list us as a Satellite Meeting.
   • Frank Rose spoke in favor of visiting the neuroscience history resources available in Los Angeles. Russell Johnson suggested that meeting sites should be selected only where we have members who can take care of local arrangements. Vincent Wan noted two advantages of meeting with the AAHM meeting in Toronto: consistency (meeting the same time every year) and the regard in which the AAHM is held.

   • Motion: Decide now on a meeting site?
     • Yes: 3 votes
     • No: 12 votes ; motion defeated

   • Appoint the North American president and the executive committee to decide on the meeting site? Motion approved by acclamation.
   
   

9. Elections  (Stan Finger)
   
   
   • President-elect (from North America) nominations:
     • Harry Whitaker [elected by secret ballot]
     • George York

   • SF raised question on how to run elections--by ballot in the mail, or at meetings? He reported that an executive decision was made to do it at the meetings.
   • Point of order by Sam Greenblatt, who noted that by-laws stipulate "officers are elected by the Board of Directors". SF stated this must be a misprint, that we need to change it to "membership at the annual meeting".

   • Board of Directors, composed of Presidents (Past, Present, and Elect), Secretary, Treasurer, and 2 other Members-at-Large. Nominations for Members-at-Large:
     • George York [elected by secret ballot]
     • Hansruedi Isler
     • Louise Marshall
     • Malcolm Macmillan [elected by secret ballot]
     • H.W. Gillen
     • Steven Jacyna
   
   

10. Straw Poll on next meeting site  (Harry Whitaker)
    
    
    • Nominations:
      • Los Angeles: 9 votes
      • Toronto/Montreal: 9 votes
    
    

11. Other Business  (Stan Finger)
    
    
    • Ed Fine invited members to visit museums in Buffalo, including Harold Brody's Neuroanatomy Museum at SUNY at Buffalo.
    • Russell Johnson asked for a charge from the Publications Committee and the Society to put together an official ISHN home page on the World-Wide Web; asked for volunteer assistance (George York and Harry Whitaker volunteered)
    
    
12. Business Meeting adjourned at 12:35pm
    
    

Minutes recorded and transcribed by Russell Johnson for Duane Haines; revised 8 July 1996

[Return to 1996 ISHN 1st Annual Meeting - Program]

[Return to ISHN Homepage]