@plos @plosone Is it really forbidden to have a numbered reference such as "24. personal communication from Steve Koch?" The PLoS ONE production staff didn't complain, but on re-reading style guidlines, it says not to. I'd prefer to leave it in, since it gives credit to someone. Thanks for any advice!
Allyson Lister
and
Dan Hagon
liked this
I must admit that whenever I see these types of reference it does wind me up a bit. Clearly it's great to give attribution but I kind of think that references should pass some practical means of verifiability.
- Dan Hagon
@Bill, I think the idea that a reference MUST be something revisitable is too constricting. It negates the value and contribution that informal communication makes to research. There's also a terrific history of such "informal" conversations being prime motivators in getting new science done and current work improved. Have a reference that refers to a publication doesn't guarantee the author's interpretation of the publication is sound anymore than interpretation following a conversation. I do agree that it is difficult for the reader, but most of the personal comm references I've seen refer to very specific points and not large-scale change makers. The large scale stuff is usually taken care of in acknowledgments b/c the scope of the help exceeds what can be usefully referenced.
- Mickey Schafer