To the Editor: When I read the "2010 in Review" editorial in the December 2010 issue of the Journal (1), I noticed that in contrast to other years there was neither an imaging study among the selections, nor any article primarily focusing on genetic and molecular mechanisms. To someone regularly reading the Journal, this may seem interesting. Over the past decade, nearly 20% of the Journal 's articles and brief reports were neuroimaging related. Although there are always changes reflecting major trends, such as fewer PET studies published in recent years compared with the early 2000s, the overall number of imaging studies published per year remains largely constant. Reports that specifically investigate genetic topics in psychiatry are on the rise, and they now account for about another 10% of the Journal 's articles. Although these articles provide new insights into the mechanisms of behavior, disease, or treatment response, we may tend to perceive all these studies in a certain way when we shift our view from one month's issue of the Journal to the larger time frame of an entire year. Do these articles simply address a smaller percentage of the Journal 's readers? Are they too focused, not reflecting the "big picture"? It could be something else.