[Shank]

I really think that nature's domain name causes people to misjudge articles like this. Nature is a very very reputable journal, but the domain (nature.com) hosts all of their (albeit still very nice) derivative journals.

To the casual observer who doesn't click the link (and just reads the headline on HN), it appears that many articles are Nature articles, when in-fact, they are articles from other journals.

This is published in Translational Psychiatry, which is still a reputable journal by all measures, but it appears to be in Nature by domain alone. The difference between Nature and its sub-journals are quite significant, since Nature is reserved for the "cream of the crop." So, to the casual observer, it may appear as a larger breakthrough than it may be.

I only point this out because I've definitely had the "ooh, a new article in Nature on HN?" reaction, only to be left wanting more because the article isn't a Nature article.

[heyoni]

Good callout. I absolutely had this reaction to it.

[aaron695]

> Nature is a very very reputable journal, but the domain (nature.com) hosts all of their (albeit still very nice) derivative journals.

If it was reputable Nature would not do this, they deal in deceit if this is true, deliberately confusing people. I see no reason to trust 'Nature' then, although I'm not even sure what 'Nature' is.

Was it 'Nature' who told us who to vote for? Or do they get to hide behind these facades on that as well?