COGSCIdotNL
cognitive science and more
 
cognitive science and more
Managing your references with Zotero

Update Nov 16, 2010: If you have trouble getting Zotero/ OpenOffice to work on Linux, please see this post.

If you've ever written a paper or a thesis you will no doubt agree that reference management can be a daunting task. You have to make sure that every reference in the text appears in the reference list, and, conversely, that every item from the reference list actually appears in the text. There are also many style guidelines that you're supposed to adhere to.

For example, according to the publication manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), the first time that you cite a paper you have to list all authors (unless there are more than five authors), like “(Author1, Author2, & Author3, 2010)”. In subsequent citations, you should name only the first author, like “(Author1 et al., 2010)”. In itself, this is a sensible rule, but it means that you have to keep track of where in the text you cite a paper for the first time. This also means that you have to update your citations whenever you shuffle around paragraphs. These are precisely the types of trivialities that you do not want to bother with while writing a manuscript!

Fortunately, there are software packages available that help you manage your references. The most famous of these are BibTeX (which is actually a format used by multiple tools), EndNote (widely used, but proprietary) and Zotero. If you want to cite a paper, you simply tell the reference manager to insert a citation somewhere in your manuscript (this, of course, requires integration with your word processor) and a properly formatted citation magically appears. A reference list is also generated automatically. Nice!

In this post I will focus on Zotero, which is a free and open source reference manager. I have used Zotero on a daily basis for almost two years now and I have grown to depend on it. Zotero is not a standalone program, but it consists of two plugins for the Firefox internet browser. The first plugin is the actual reference manager. The second plugin provides integration with your word processor. Open Office and Microsoft Word are supported. Once you have installed Zotero and do a search on Google Scholar (this also works on most other scientific websites) a small icon appears in your navigation bar (Figure 1). If you click this item, a dialog pops up, which asks you to select the item that you want to import into Zotero (Figure 2).

Figure 1. You can import references by clicking on the "Save to Zotero" button.

Figure 2. If a page contains multiple references, which is the case with Google Scholar, you need to specify which item you want to import.

In order to open the main Zotero interface, you click on the Zotero icon at the bottom-right of your Firefox window (Figure 3).

Figure 3. The main Zotero interface, which appears if you click on the Zotero icon in the bottom-right of your Firefox window.

In the main Zotero interface, you can modify references, manually add new references (importing references through a website is much more efficient, though) and attach files to references. The fact that you can attach files to references is very convenient, because it allows you to save the actual PDF files within your reference manager! You might also want to take a look at Gnotero, which is my own sidekick to Zotero (Figure 4). With Gnotero you can quickly search and open your references, without having to open Firefox. This saves some time, because in my experience the Zotero plugin is a bit sluggish.

Figure 4. Gnotero provides easy access to your Zotero references.

Of course, the really useful aspect of a reference manager is the integration with your word processor. Zotero appears in Open Office as a collection of buttons in the toolbar (Figure 5). Integration with Microsoft Word works similarly.

Figure 5. Zotero appears as a collection of toolbar buttons in your word processor.

If you click on the “add citation” button, a dialog appears, in which you can select a reference (Figure 6). The first time that you add a citation, you also need to specify the style that you want to use (for this example I used the APA style) and whether you wish to use ReferenceMarks or Bookmarks. The latter option is slightly technical. If you select BookMarks, you can save your document in Microsoft Word (.doc) format. If you select ReferenceMarks you must save your document in Open Document (.odt) format. In my experience, ReferenceMarks is the preferred option, because there are some stability issues with BookMarks (although these may have been resolved by now).

Figure 6. Adding a citation to your manuscript in your word processor.

The citation appears as a gray field in your manuscript (Figure 7). A reference list can also be generated automatically.

Figure 7. A citation (gray) and reference list, as they appear in the word processor.

Pros and cons

Pros

  • Zotero is free and open source.
  • Development on Zotero is very active and there is a large and friendly community of Zotero users.
  • You can use Zotero to store PDFs.
  • Zotero is available for all platforms.

Cons

  • The Zotero interface is a bit sluggish. If you need quicker access to your Zotero references, take a look at Gnotero.
  • Zotero requires Firefox. Although Firefox is a nice browser, it would have been nice if Zotero could be used with other browsers as well.
  • Zotero does not handle all types of references gracefully. For example, you will manually need to modify the way that “in press” papers and book chapters are cited, at least when using the APA style.
  • In the past, I have experienced some stability issues with Zotero, especially when using BookMarks in Open Office. In all fairness, Zotero's stability has greatly improved over the last few releases and I hardly experience any issues anymore.

In summary, I would definitely recommend Zotero to anyone who is looking for a good reference manager!

 
Ballsy bushcrickets

In a recent study in Biology Letters, Vahed and colleagues measured the size of testes in a number of bushcricket species. They found that in species with slutty females (i.e., a high level of polyandry), the males have larger testes. Somewhat surprisingly, however, larger testes do not lead to larger ejaculations, but instead to more frequent ejaculations. Clearly, the males are quite promiscuous as well.

Source: Wikimedia Commons

However, the real reason for mentioning this study is that Vahed and colleagues found a particular species of bushcricket, in which the testes account for a whopping 13.8% of the males' total body weight! The most ballsy animal ever found.

References

Vahed, K., Parker, D., & Gilbert, J. (in press) Larger testes are associated with a higher level of polyandry, but a smaller ejaculate volume, across bushcricket species (Tettigoniidae). Biology Letters. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2010.0840. [Link]

 
I love you with my left eye

Although most animals are bilaterally symmetric, there are numerous subtle differences between left and right. An obvious example is that most humans prefer one hand, usually the right, over the other. Another famous example is the lateralization of most language functions to the left hemisphere of the brain.

Our perception of the world is not perfectly symmetrical either. In general we pay more attention to what happens to our right, but this preference is heavily dependent on context. When it comes to social interactions, we prefer the left visual field. For example, we tend to hold babies so that the baby faces us from the left.

Beluga mother and calf (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

This left-side preference in social interactions is not limited to humans. Chicks, for example, prefer to view other familiar chicks with their left eye (they also peck more at other chicks if they approach from the left - a social interaction, but not a very friendly one). And in a recent paper in PLoS One, Karenina and colleagues show that baby Beluga whales prefer to swim on their mothers right side, presumably so the baby can view its mother with its left eye. You might wonder if it's not the other way around, so that the mothers prefer to view the babies with their right eye, but apparently this is not the case. The mother whales are pretty much just floating around, and the babies control most of the interactions. Call me soft, but I think this is a pretty cute illustration of lateralization in social interactions.

References

Karenina, K., Giljov, A., Baranov, V., Osipova, L., Krasnova, V., & Malashichev, Y. (2010). Visual laterality of calf-mother interactions in wild whales. PLoS ONE, 5(11), e13787. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0013787

Vallortigara, G. (2000). Comparative neuropsychology of the dual brain: A stroll through animals' left and right perceptual worlds. Brain and Language, 73(2), 189-219. doi:10.1006/brln.2000.2303

 
Creating anaglyphs

A big problem in psychological experiments is that the stimulus material is generally not very realistic. (For example, what do smileys really tell us about processing of emotional expressions?) This problem plagues my experiments as much as anybody else's. Therefore, in an attempt to add some extra realism to my stimuli I created anaglyphs today. Anaglyphs are images that convey a sense of 3d when viewed with red/blue (or sometimes red/ green) glasses. I'm not entirely sure yet if anaglyphs are suitable stimulus material, because they can be a little hard to view (they tend to look out-of-focus). But I guess I'll find out!

Here is a short video of the set-up that I used for creating the anaglyphs.

 
Immaculate conception of the serpent

Update Nov 4 2010: After reading some more about the immaculate conception, I learned that it is actually not the same as the virgin birth of Jesus according to Christian doctrine. So the title of this post is somewhat misleading, for which my apologies.

Parthenogenesis, usually called immaculate conception when it occurs in humans, is a type of asexual reproduction. Many invertebrate species do it and cases of facultative (i.e., without human intervention) parthenogenesis in vertrebrates have been reported as well. In a forthcoming paper in Biology Letters, Booth and colleagues describe a case of parthenogenesis in the Boa constrictor. Apparently, this is the first time that parthenogenesis in Boa constrictors has been shown to produce viable offspring.

Source: Wikimedia Commons

The baby snakes are a little “off”, though. In Boa constrictors (and in many other species, including birds), females are heterogametic, which means that they have two different sex chromosomes (ZW). Male snakes are homogametic, having two of the same sex chromosomes (ZZ). (Note that it is the other way around in mammals, in which the males are heterogametic (XY) and the females homogametic (XX).) The asexually reproduced snakes are female, but not of the ordinary type, since they carry two WW chromosomes. The authors are puzzled by the lack of males (ZZ) in the litter and suggest that the mother snake may have been a genetic freak, lacking a Z chromosome.

References

Booth, W., Johnson, D. H., Moore, S., Schal, C., & Vargo, E. L. (in press). Evidence for viable, non-clonal but fatherless Boa constrictors. Biology Letters. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2010.0793