One of the concepts that will indissolubly remain linked to this long, exhausting fight against COVID-19 is “social distancing”. This is the idea that, being at a good distance from each other (1 meter? 3 meters? 8 meters?), we are protected against possible virus contamination. The aim of this sort of distancing is also to reduce the likelihood of contact among people who have an infection, to minimize disease transmission and, in some cases, death. The theme of social distancing has been a topic that sociologists of the early ‘900 investigated very rigorously, suggesting a set of meanings are different from the those that today seem to characterize the choices on how to contain the pandemic. Significantly, among other things, improper use of the concept of social distancing explicitly clashes with the strong conviction, also in mass media during those difficult days, that “united we would make it”. Social distancing as a common force to combat the pandemic, in short, appears more and more as an oxymoron, because in reality, the call to give a hand to those who cannot make it, to be united, to form a group, in a few words to “make a community” is exactly the opposite of social distancing. Community means working closely, caring for oneself and others, social solidarity, networking and group (Forastiere et al., 2020). In the tradition of sociological studies, one of the first references to the concept of social distance is found in Simmel, who introduces the concept of Soziale Distanz, where the theme of distance takes shape in the framework of handling space and spatial systems of society. Simmel considers space as a logical and perceptive “opener”. In this sense, space is not something to be experienced, but a psychic content in which the soul experiences itself. Space is located at a time where the passage into it from the outside and the interaction of individuals with it is completed by revealing psychosocial content. In short, in a non-physical sense, the nature of space is social. Its forms and meanings are therefore the result of social, material and symbolic practices. According to Simmel, the process of distancing is at the basis of the construction of social groups and the establishment of relationships, which are influenced by prejudices and attitudes that create different levels of social distance among people (Simmel 1890). Social distance, defined as relational closure and the unavailability of a person to other persons who are perceived and recognized as different from themselves based on specific social categories, is the result of a set of factors placed on three dimensions: physical, symbolic and geometric. The first dimension concerns the placement of people in space (residential neighbourhoods, places of work and leisure); the second concerns the cultural categories used by people to know and explore social reality; and the third concerns the relationship between the organization of physical space and categorical production (Cesareo, 2007). Furthermore, there are three basic aspects of social distancing: 1) perceiving, 2) shaking, and 3) suffering. The first refers to people’s perception of a contact with others based on distance. The second concerns the relationships, in everyday life, that people have with each other, and that they would like to shake off. The third concerns a person’s relationship with people who do not seem to want to have anything to do with him or her (Bichi, 2008). Robert Park, in the early 1920s, defined space as “an attempt to reduce the quality and degrees of understanding and intimacy that characterize personal and social relationships in general to something measurable in purely physical terms” (Maturo, 2007). Instead, space is the degree of closeness or intimacy that an individual or group feel towards another individual or group in a social network, the level of trust the people in a group have for each other, and the degree of perceived similarity of beliefs.   References Salute pubblica, libertà individuale e controllo sociale. Le vaccinazioni obbligatorie in Italia in «Salute e Società» 2020. Digital Health and the Gamification of Life: How Apps Can Promote a Positive Medicalization. Emerald Publishing, 2018. Sociologia della salute. Prevenzione sociale e sanitaria delle malattie. Rubbettino, 2016. Forastiere F, Micheli A, Salmaso S, Vineis P. Epidemiologica e Covid-19 in Italia. Epidemiologia & Prevenzione (Editoriale), 24 (2), 2020. OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris DOI https://doi.org/10.1787/health_glance_eur-2018-en Maciocco G. Emergenza Coronavirus: tempi di precarietà. Epidemie e globalizzazione. welforum.it, 31.03.2020. Maturo A., Sociologia della malattia. Un’introduzione, FrancoAngeli, Mi, 2007. Bichi R. La distanza sociale. Vecchie e nuove scale di misurazione, FrancoAngeli, Milano, 2008. Cesareo, V. La distanza sociale. Una ricerca nelle aree urbane italiane, FrancoAngeli, Milano, 2007.

This July 2022, the European Scientific Institute, next to its several peer reviewed journals, among which is one of the largest interdisciplinary journals in Europe – the European Scientific Journal, ESJ, launched on its website a new platform specifically devoted to the publication of preprints.  Respecting the tradition of ESI, its Preprints platform is a multidisciplinary floor that allows all scientific manuscripts from all fields of research immediately available. Preprints are various types of research papers that have neither been subjected to peer-review nor published in a journal. In most cases, they can be viewed as completed or almost completed articles that are nonetheless ready to be shared with the international scientific community. All preprints undergo a short screening and if they pass the screening process are posted online in open access format under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license. Once online, preprints can be downloaded, shared, and cited. This gives maximum visibility to authors while ensuring their proper recognition for their work. With preprints, authors are in control of when their work appears, and if they want to change or add to the paper, they can submit a new version at any time. To ensure that citations are not affected, preprints assigned a DOI will have a new DOI issued for each version. An article published as preprint can be submitted, and after the peer review, can be published in any scientific journal. The ESI preprints platform is only the most recent project the ESI has designed to help reach the 17 sustainable development goals (SDG) set by the United Nations. Indeed, ESI as member of the SDG Publishers Compact has the SDGs at heart among its objectives. All ESI activities, its books, journals and its preprints platform are open to all researchers regardless of their gender, religion, race, geographical origin and nationality, and with its low publication fees is committed to SDG 5 (Gender Equality) and SDG 10 (Reduce Inequalities). ESI books, journals and preprints are all open access, and the preprints are a fast way to make researchers’ scientific works immediately available to the international scientific community, so contributing to SDG 4 (Quality Education), and SDG 10 (Reduce Inequalities). SDG 4 is also promoted through ESI several peer reviewed journals, and the many Conferences and forums organized in all parts of the world, which gather scholars with different backgrounds to share their scientific outcomes. Quality Education is also a main aim of the ESI Post-doctoral programs 1) Social Sciences and Humanities in a Post-Crisis Period; 2) Computer Sciences and Engineering; 3) Life and Natural Sciences in a Post-crisis Period; and 4) New Technologies and Law. The programs are in both English and Spanish, and to this aim, the ESI is partnered with many Universities all around Europe, which are involved with post-doc higher education of scholars all around the globe. Furthermore, the many partnerships of ESI with universities, research institutes and industries all over the world favor SDG 9 (Industry Innovation and Infrastructure) and 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). All of this work and all the effort in helping, as publisher, in developing the Goals set by the United Nations are possible only thanks to your joint commitment as people, researchers, scholars and academics all over the world, which I thank, and I hope that we will continue to work together for years to come.

The 10 th Mediterranean Interdisciplinary Forum on Social Sciences and Humanities is over, and by now, all of us who attended are back at home and to our normal daily activities. After two difficult years for everyone, we have finally had the chance to all meet in person. I had never been to Tenerife before, but immediately after landing, I realized that I had arrived in a gorgeous island inhabited by welcoming and serene people. With its mild and gentle temperatures, Tenerife embraced all of us with days of sunshine and warm, calm waters. Tenerife, like all over Spain, offers a restful atmosphere on its beaches and in the hundreds of little restaurants and cafés located all around the island, which offer delicious food and refreshing wines. More than ever, I wanted to thank all of you who had the chance to share this wonderful experience with me, for your time and dedication. As a result of our participation, we were able to contribute interesting and inspiring presentations to advance social sciences and humanities, with the support of professionals and researchers around the world. Indeed, we came to La Laguna University from 13 different countries, scattered in all continents. In my opinion, a conference is not only a moment for presenting our scientific work, but it is also a moment for sharing, for listening, for exchanging among people who have common scientific interests. Furthermore, an international conference like the one we just attended in Tenerife, is also and foremost an opportunity for professional and personal relational enrichment. I warmly thank all the Colleagues and friends from the University of La Laguna for their professional and accurate organization, and for making all of us feel at home. Especially, I thank Jovan and Dejan for their tireless work and support to all of us, and mostly, for their smiles and friendship. I thank all of you once again, and I hope that you will continue to support ESI, its journals and all its activities.

I am writing this book review of Michael Alley’s The Craft of Scientific Writing[1]  (Springer) to alert readers of the ESI Blog of this excellent resource to improve your writing. Back in 1964, the Canadian philosopher Marshall McLuhan  gained fame with his seminal essay The Medium is the Message[2] which argued that the medium of a message was just as important as its content.  McLuhan presaged the rapid movement of information and data from the printed page to the electronic screen.  When I wrote my first scientific paper in 1972, all scientific articles were printed; now most are viewed electronically.  My first paper was composed on a typewriter and submitted to the journal editors in triplicate; now all submissions are electronic.  My first literature searches used the printed Index Medicus[3] ; fifty years later, I search PubMed[4] electronically. To its credit, the European Scientific Journal accepts submissions in English, French, and Spanish.  Nonetheless, the de facto twenty-first century language of science is British or American English.  Work that is widely read or widely cited is written in English.  Alley aims to improve the scientific writing of scientists and engineers who write in English. This is a very good book that I highly recommend. It is in its fourth edition and has been improved since its original publication in 1987.  Alley states in his preface that “as an engineer or scientist, your writing affects not only how much credit you receive for your work but also how much influence your work has. (page vii)”.  Alley eloquently concludes his preface with a “… wish that this book would make your scientific writing easy.  Unfortunately, scientific writing is hard work. The best scientific writers struggle with every paragraph, every sentence, every phrase.  They write, then rewrite, then rewrite again….(page ix)”. As editors and peer reviewers, we evaluate both the medium and the message of each submission.  The message of a submission reflects the quality of the research.  The medium reflects the quality of the scientific writing.  At the European Scientific Journal, we are committed to helping authors submit their best content combined with their best writing. This book is filled with sage advice, illustrated by wonderful writing examples (what to do and what not to do). I recommend reading this book cover to cover including the superb appendices on grammar, punctuation, word usage, and document formatting. A few of Alley’s recommendations deserve emphasis. Pick a descriptive title that engages the reader. The title should convey the main point of your article and give the reader a compelling reason to read it.  My very first paper published had a bland title “Studies on the mechanism of action of nerve growth factor”[5].  In retrospect, I could have used a more engaging title such as “Nerve growth factor stimulates the synthesis of microtubule protein”. Avoid unprofessional informality.  Many, otherwise good submissions, are marred by excessive informality.  The use of contractions such as it’s, shouldn’t, wouldn’t, don’t, couldn’t do not belong in formal scientific writing. Alley is opposed to the use of & for and, the use of vs. for versus, and the use of et al. for and others. Aim for both clarity and precision.  Scientific writing needs to be both precise and clear.  Precision means that you have conveyed your meaning without confusion or ambiguity.  Clarity means that the reader can grasp your meaning and intent without undo effort. Avoid unnecessary complexity.  Alley quotes Einstein who wrote “In scientific writing, keep things as simple as possible, yet no simpler”[6].  In general, the complexity of writing increases with the number of words in a sentence and the length of the words used.  Complexity can be reduced by using smaller words, avoiding jargon, avoiding indecipherable abbreviations, and writing shorter sentences.  Reading level is calculated by the Flesch Kincaid metric which considers word length and sentence length.  Alley recommends aiming for a reading level of 10-13.  Microsoft Word will automatically calculate the Flesch Kincaid reading level[7].  Word calculates the reading level of this book review as 10. Avoid ambiguity.  Ambiguity occurs when competing and incompatible interpretations of your writing is possible.  Alley gives an example of an ambiguous sentence such as “The proposed schedule is discussed below for the next four years.”  It is unclear whether the schedule is for four years, or whether the discussion is for four years. Aesthetics matter.  Alley believes that good scientific writing  is precise, concise, and clear.  But it is also beautiful.  He finds aesthetically unpleasing writing distasteful.  He especially dislikes the use of TITLES OR SUBTITLES IN ALL CAPITALS hard to read and ugly.  He does not like the use of excessive abbreviations with periods.  He prefers CNS to C.N.S. (central nervous system), AMU to A.M.U. (atomic mass unit), and ICU to I.C.U. (intensive care unit).  He is always looking for more aesthetically pleasing phrasing such as arranged for made the arrangement for, decided for made the decision, and measured for made the measurement of. Alley has useful lessons on moving from the familiar to the complex, optimal organization of content, methods for providing proper emphasis, and  tips for using your writing time efficiently. Finally, Alley concludes by distinguishing between the process of revising and the process of finishing a document. Revising is the iterative process of improving the document through repetitive edits to improve clarity, precision, and organization. Finishing is the final step of ensuring that the document is free of errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation just prior to submission. On personal note, I found this book extremely helpful.  I recommend it without reservation.  Some non-primary English speaking writers may find it too difficult to grasp.  Although I engage in extensive revising and finishing of my own documents, I am always surprised to discover that some errors slip through my review process at the time of submission. Like Alley, I believe that reading aloud a document is important to catching errors. For those of you with Microsoft Word, this process can be automated with the Read Aloud option[8]. 

During these past years, I have had the honor to serve as a Specialty Chief Editor for the Humanities section of the European Scientific Journal (ESJ), and more recently, I have also been included in the editorial staff of the International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture (LLC) as Associate Editor. In the past years, I have also reviewed an enormous amount of articles for many different journals that publish diverse themes and subjects around the world. All of these extremely exciting activities have given me the possibility to come across and read a large number of papers. I must say, with profound sadness that I still see much too much non-inclusive language. Coherently, I felt the need to use my blog to further stress the importance of being particularly aware of the language we use, especially in an academic context like the one we live in, in that it should serve as an example for all others. What is inclusive language? Any language that treats people unfairly, insults, or excludes a person or group of persons is non-inclusive language (from https://www.vercidagroup.com/). On the contrary, inclusive language demonstrates awareness of the vast diversity of people in the world. Inclusive expressions don’t presume to know someone’s gender or imply biased or prejudiced ideas. Whether that’s in relation to ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, ability, or any other personal characteristic. Using inclusive language offers respect and belonging to all people — so it’s about more than just avoiding offensive language (from https://medium.com/diversity-together). What can we do? We should all know and remember that paper selection and review process have changed dramatically during the past years. In order for us to be effective writers/reviewers and diversity practitioners, we need to stay abreast of new words, concepts, and trends that impact our work, and we should learn to use the right language in every situation. The way we live, work, and feel has changed during these past years, and so has language. Commonplace expressions of the past may once have been acceptable but in the modern day are offensive.  When we write, sometimes we need to address gender, culture, religion, race, and many many other themes that might represent pitfalls in terms of inclusive language use. However, just like every language, inclusive language is structured on rules and frameworks that we can learn and apply when we write, review/revise a paper. So, please let’s always Put the accent on the person Use gender neutral grammar and statements Avoid phrases with racist, underrepresented, ethnic or cultural offensive meaning Avoid mental health language and derogatory terms Avoid terms or phrases related to disability or diseases in general that might include non-respectful language Use religion neutral statements with all their correlates.   More importantly, let’s learn to think ‘inclusively’ before we write, review/revise, speak. Let’s always learn to consider that when we write, review/revise, speak, we might be negatively connoting a person’s diversity. Franca Daniele