The submissions portal is now Closed.
1) Only current (expiration date of 5/31/2020) EPA members, fellows, and associates may submit proposals. You may join EPA or renew your membership at http://www.easternpsychological.org/. After logging in as a current member, fellow or associate, you will be given access to the submission portal. 2) Each EPA member may submit one paper proposal, one poster proposal, and one symposium proposal. EPA associates may only submit one poster proposal. Associate members may not give a talk in a paper session or symposium. Submitters can be co-authors on other submissions submitted by other members. 3) If you are submitting a paper or a poster, you must be the first author. 4) If you are submitting a symposium, you must be the chair. You also may be a presenter and/or be the discussant. If you are organizing and submitting a symposium, remember that all presenters within the symposium must be first author on their presentations and must be EPA members. EPA associates are not eligible to make oral presentations within a symposium, 5) All research described in the proposal must be complete at the time of submission. 6) You will be required to submit a short 75 word abstract and a long 500-1000 word abstract using text boxes on our submission site (references do not count toward the word total). Fellows may submit one proposal with a short 75 word abstract only (no long abstract required). You may also cut and paste text into the boxes. The boxes will not accommodate graphics. Remember that what you submit is final. So, please proof read your submission carefully. 7) The submission deadline is November 15, 2019, 5:00pm, EASTERN STANDARD TIME (A separate deadline of December 1, 2019, will be observed for the special undergraduate poster session). 8) IF YOU FAIL TO FOLLOW ALL INSTRUCTIONS YOUR SUBMISSION CAN BE REJECTED WITHOUT REVIEW.
Criteria for Acceptance of EPA Submissions The Program Committee has prepared this guide to the submission review process to assist reviewers in their evaluation of whether a submission meets the criteria necessary for acceptance. We are making it available to the EPA membership in an effort to help members prepare acceptable abstracts of talks, symposia and posters. In addition to considering the proposed criteria, we ask reviewers to keep the following in mind while conducting their reviews: The EPA conference provides an opportunity for scholars, practitioners, and students of psychology to come together annually to share research and ideas that foster the development of the field. EPA strives both to create an inclusive opportunity for current and future psychologists to convene and to create an atmosphere where what is presented is of significant quality and relevance. Talks and symposia use significant time and resources and help establish EPA’s external standing as well as attract registration, in addition to contributing to the exchange of ideas and advancement of the discipline. Consequently, the quality dimension is particularly salient for these submissions. Posters take significantly less time and fewer resources for EPA and provide opportunities for individuals with specific interests to share ideas more intimately. They are also an excellent way for students to get experience engaging in scholarship. Criteria for poster acceptance are more flexible as a result.
For all types of submissions:
Submissions should include an Introduction, Method, Results, and Discussion section (exceptions are possible for theoretical papers or other unusual types)
Data collection should be complete at the time of submission.
Sufficient analyses should be complete to establish the basic outcome of the research.
Further, for acceptance as a talk:
Research should address a topic of current relevance to the field. The Introduction and Discussion should place the research in the context of existing literature and should make clear how the current research is advancing understanding of the issue addressed.
Results should include some significant effect(s) (exceptions are possible if a compelling case is made for the informativeness of a null result or failure to replicate, etc.).
Methods should be sound and writing should be clear and well-organized.
For acceptance as a regular poster:
Similar to above but may be less strong in some respects (e.g., justification for research question not as compelling, or results marginally significant/pattern not entirely clear, or writing not always easy to follow).
Still must make an identifiable contribution to advancing knowledge in the field.
For acceptance as a Poster in the Special Undergraduate poster session, click on the button above labeled "Special Undergraduate poster session."