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.
Submissions should include an Introduction, Method, Results, and Discussion section (exceptions are possible for theoretical papers or other unusual types)
Data collection must be complete at the time of submission.
Sufficient analyses should be complete to establish the basic outcome of the research.
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.
Similar to talks 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.
May have more substantial weaknesses (e.g., little situating of the research in the context of existing literature, or no significant results).
Note: Undergraduate research submissions that meet the standard criteria above for a regular poster will be accepted as such. The “Undergraduate Research” designation is to allow acceptance of undergraduate submissions that do not meet the standard criteria.
Please note that space for this poster session is very limited. Undergraduates are encouraged to submit for a regular poster session if they meet the criteria.