Being asked to review a paper in conference one has submitted to
As stated in the title (an IEEE conference). Does this create a conflict of interest antithetical to the reviewing process? Is it possible that accepting or refusing to review could jeopardise the chances of one's own paper being accepted?
peer-review ethics conference conflict-of-interest
edited 3 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
asked 4 hours ago
StumblerStumbler
697412
add a comment |
As stated in the title (an IEEE conference). Does this create a conflict of interest antithetical to the reviewing process? Is it possible that accepting or refusing to review could jeopardise the chances of one's own paper being accepted?
peer-review ethics conference conflict-of-interest
edited 3 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
asked 4 hours ago
StumblerStumbler
697412
2
As another example, I just finished reviewing papers for CogSci 2019, and while I didn't submit, I know a few people who both reviewed and submitted. As far as I know, it's pretty common at conferences this large, and the sheer numbers involved--both in terms of total submissions, and variety of areas--make it extremely unlikely for you accepting a paper you reviewed to have any effect on the chances of your own paper getting accepted.
– twoblackboxes
3 hours ago
add a comment |
As stated in the title (an IEEE conference). Does this create a conflict of interest antithetical to the reviewing process? Is it possible that accepting or refusing to review could jeopardise the chances of one's own paper being accepted?
peer-review ethics conference conflict-of-interest
edited 3 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
asked 4 hours ago
StumblerStumbler
697412
As stated in the title (an IEEE conference). Does this create a conflict of interest antithetical to the reviewing process? Is it possible that accepting or refusing to review could jeopardise the chances of one's own paper being accepted?
peer-review ethics conference conflict-of-interest
peer-review ethics conference conflict-of-interest
edited 3 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
asked 4 hours ago
StumblerStumbler
697412
edited 3 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
asked 4 hours ago
StumblerStumbler
697412
edited 3 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
edited 3 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
edited 3 hours ago
corey979
4,27052233
4,27052233
asked 4 hours ago
StumblerStumbler
697412
asked 4 hours ago
StumblerStumbler
697412
asked 4 hours ago
StumblerStumbler
697412
697412
2
As another example, I just finished reviewing papers for CogSci 2019, and while I didn't submit, I know a few people who both reviewed and submitted. As far as I know, it's pretty common at conferences this large, and the sheer numbers involved--both in terms of total submissions, and variety of areas--make it extremely unlikely for you accepting a paper you reviewed to have any effect on the chances of your own paper getting accepted.
– twoblackboxes
3 hours ago
add a comment |
2
As another example, I just finished reviewing papers for CogSci 2019, and while I didn't submit, I know a few people who both reviewed and submitted. As far as I know, it's pretty common at conferences this large, and the sheer numbers involved--both in terms of total submissions, and variety of areas--make it extremely unlikely for you accepting a paper you reviewed to have any effect on the chances of your own paper getting accepted.
– twoblackboxes
3 hours ago
2
2
As another example, I just finished reviewing papers for CogSci 2019, and while I didn't submit, I know a few people who both reviewed and submitted. As far as I know, it's pretty common at conferences this large, and the sheer numbers involved--both in terms of total submissions, and variety of areas--make it extremely unlikely for you accepting a paper you reviewed to have any effect on the chances of your own paper getting accepted.
– twoblackboxes
3 hours ago
As another example, I just finished reviewing papers for CogSci 2019, and while I didn't submit, I know a few people who both reviewed and submitted. As far as I know, it's pretty common at conferences this large, and the sheer numbers involved--both in terms of total submissions, and variety of areas--make it extremely unlikely for you accepting a paper you reviewed to have any effect on the chances of your own paper getting accepted.
– twoblackboxes
3 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
No, there is no conflict. Your advice will be backed up or not by other reviewers. Likely the conference committee already knows that you are also a submitter.
But if you want double assurance of this, just send a note to the program chair that you have also submitted. If they see any issue, they will deal with it.
Just give an honest review as you would in any case. And trust that your paper will be accepted or not on its merits. Of course, there is quite a lot of competition, but that is always true.
answered 3 hours ago
BuffyBuffy
50.5k13164250
I would add to this to say that colleagues have realised in the past, after submitting to a conference they were reviewing, that it was not against the rules but also "not the done thing", something you can't possibly know without speaking to the program chair! So getting in touch with the program chair should clear it all up.
– Jack Parkinson
3 hours ago
add a comment |
I see no reason why it would be a conflict of interest. An analogous question would be if there is a conflict of interest in you reviewing papers in a journal you might publish in. Given that other conference attendees are in the same/similar field as you, and are interested in a good conference, those attendees would seem to be the ideal group to pull reviewers from.
In conferences where I've seen the sausage being made, accepting to review gains no advantage. Refusing any and all review requests will ultimately be viewed as rude, but will not disadvantage you in having your paper accepted. (Invitations for invited talks and membership on the conference committee may well be hindered, however.)
answered 3 hours ago
Jon CusterJon Custer
3,93121326
1
Journals aren't analogous because there's more scope for accepting "too many" papers today and dealing with the backlog tomorrow. Conferences are closer to a zero-sum game, where getting rid of competitors makes it more likely that your own paper will be accepted.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
@DavidRicherby - still it is a pretty close analog, perhaps less so now than in the old days of mail delivery of printed copies of journals. A finite number of papers are published a year. A 'conference proceedings' issue of a journal could often dwarf the rest of the journal's output that year, at least in the old days. The point is, your fellow attendees (and paper submitters) are the same folks as are publishing in your favorite journal(s).
– Jon Custer
2 hours ago
Sure but a journal can always accept your paper today and not actually print it for another three or four issues. It can also decide to print an extra issue to make up the backlog, of print fatter issues for a while. A conference doesn't have the option of saying "We're accepting your paper, but you can't present it until next year" and it has less scope for making the conference larger to accommodate more papers.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Assuming the papers are part of a blind peer-review process, I've never seen an example of this cited as a conflict of interest. Doesn't mean it isn't a potential conflict; I haven't come across this as such.
What would the conflict be in this regard? Are you worried about providing accurate feedback on papers? Usually, as a reviewer, there's a system in place whereby you're not just saying "yes" or "no" without giving written feedback.
answered 4 hours ago
PareverParever
16426
2
The conflict is that the asker can increase the chance of their own paper being accepted to the converence by giving a bad review to somebody else's paper.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I've reviewed for many CS conferences and never seen one that has a conflict of interest policy saying that people who've submitted a paper can't review. I'm sure I've reviewed papers for conferences I've submitted to. Yes, there is the slight conflict that a negative review for some other paper will likely mean a higher chance of yours being accepted, but it's going to look mighty suspicious if the reviews for a paper are "accept", "accept", "accept", "strong reject" and the "strong reject" just happens to come from a competitor.
I think I would decline to review a paper that was on a topic very close to my own submission because a positive review might be seen as "Oh, he's just hyping the subject so we think his own paper's awesome, too" and a negative review as "Oh, he's just trying to kill off the competition." At the very least, I'd check that the PC member who asked me to review was aware that I'd submitted a paper on the same topic. And you can always check that the PC member is happy for you to review.
answered 2 hours ago
David RicherbyDavid Richerby
29.6k661125
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126053%2fbeing-asked-to-review-a-paper-in-conference-one-has-submitted-to%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
No, there is no conflict. Your advice will be backed up or not by other reviewers. Likely the conference committee already knows that you are also a submitter.
But if you want double assurance of this, just send a note to the program chair that you have also submitted. If they see any issue, they will deal with it.
Just give an honest review as you would in any case. And trust that your paper will be accepted or not on its merits. Of course, there is quite a lot of competition, but that is always true.
answered 3 hours ago
BuffyBuffy
50.5k13164250
I would add to this to say that colleagues have realised in the past, after submitting to a conference they were reviewing, that it was not against the rules but also "not the done thing", something you can't possibly know without speaking to the program chair! So getting in touch with the program chair should clear it all up.
– Jack Parkinson
3 hours ago
add a comment |
No, there is no conflict. Your advice will be backed up or not by other reviewers. Likely the conference committee already knows that you are also a submitter.
But if you want double assurance of this, just send a note to the program chair that you have also submitted. If they see any issue, they will deal with it.
Just give an honest review as you would in any case. And trust that your paper will be accepted or not on its merits. Of course, there is quite a lot of competition, but that is always true.
answered 3 hours ago
BuffyBuffy
50.5k13164250
I would add to this to say that colleagues have realised in the past, after submitting to a conference they were reviewing, that it was not against the rules but also "not the done thing", something you can't possibly know without speaking to the program chair! So getting in touch with the program chair should clear it all up.
– Jack Parkinson
3 hours ago
add a comment |
No, there is no conflict. Your advice will be backed up or not by other reviewers. Likely the conference committee already knows that you are also a submitter.
But if you want double assurance of this, just send a note to the program chair that you have also submitted. If they see any issue, they will deal with it.
Just give an honest review as you would in any case. And trust that your paper will be accepted or not on its merits. Of course, there is quite a lot of competition, but that is always true.
answered 3 hours ago
BuffyBuffy
50.5k13164250
No, there is no conflict. Your advice will be backed up or not by other reviewers. Likely the conference committee already knows that you are also a submitter.
But if you want double assurance of this, just send a note to the program chair that you have also submitted. If they see any issue, they will deal with it.
Just give an honest review as you would in any case. And trust that your paper will be accepted or not on its merits. Of course, there is quite a lot of competition, but that is always true.
answered 3 hours ago
BuffyBuffy
50.5k13164250
answered 3 hours ago
BuffyBuffy
50.5k13164250
answered 3 hours ago
BuffyBuffy
50.5k13164250
answered 3 hours ago
BuffyBuffy
50.5k13164250
50.5k13164250
I would add to this to say that colleagues have realised in the past, after submitting to a conference they were reviewing, that it was not against the rules but also "not the done thing", something you can't possibly know without speaking to the program chair! So getting in touch with the program chair should clear it all up.
– Jack Parkinson
3 hours ago
add a comment |
I would add to this to say that colleagues have realised in the past, after submitting to a conference they were reviewing, that it was not against the rules but also "not the done thing", something you can't possibly know without speaking to the program chair! So getting in touch with the program chair should clear it all up.
– Jack Parkinson
3 hours ago
I would add to this to say that colleagues have realised in the past, after submitting to a conference they were reviewing, that it was not against the rules but also "not the done thing", something you can't possibly know without speaking to the program chair! So getting in touch with the program chair should clear it all up.
– Jack Parkinson
3 hours ago
I would add to this to say that colleagues have realised in the past, after submitting to a conference they were reviewing, that it was not against the rules but also "not the done thing", something you can't possibly know without speaking to the program chair! So getting in touch with the program chair should clear it all up.
– Jack Parkinson
3 hours ago
add a comment |
I see no reason why it would be a conflict of interest. An analogous question would be if there is a conflict of interest in you reviewing papers in a journal you might publish in. Given that other conference attendees are in the same/similar field as you, and are interested in a good conference, those attendees would seem to be the ideal group to pull reviewers from.
In conferences where I've seen the sausage being made, accepting to review gains no advantage. Refusing any and all review requests will ultimately be viewed as rude, but will not disadvantage you in having your paper accepted. (Invitations for invited talks and membership on the conference committee may well be hindered, however.)
answered 3 hours ago
Jon CusterJon Custer
3,93121326
1
Journals aren't analogous because there's more scope for accepting "too many" papers today and dealing with the backlog tomorrow. Conferences are closer to a zero-sum game, where getting rid of competitors makes it more likely that your own paper will be accepted.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
@DavidRicherby - still it is a pretty close analog, perhaps less so now than in the old days of mail delivery of printed copies of journals. A finite number of papers are published a year. A 'conference proceedings' issue of a journal could often dwarf the rest of the journal's output that year, at least in the old days. The point is, your fellow attendees (and paper submitters) are the same folks as are publishing in your favorite journal(s).
– Jon Custer
2 hours ago
Sure but a journal can always accept your paper today and not actually print it for another three or four issues. It can also decide to print an extra issue to make up the backlog, of print fatter issues for a while. A conference doesn't have the option of saying "We're accepting your paper, but you can't present it until next year" and it has less scope for making the conference larger to accommodate more papers.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I see no reason why it would be a conflict of interest. An analogous question would be if there is a conflict of interest in you reviewing papers in a journal you might publish in. Given that other conference attendees are in the same/similar field as you, and are interested in a good conference, those attendees would seem to be the ideal group to pull reviewers from.
In conferences where I've seen the sausage being made, accepting to review gains no advantage. Refusing any and all review requests will ultimately be viewed as rude, but will not disadvantage you in having your paper accepted. (Invitations for invited talks and membership on the conference committee may well be hindered, however.)
answered 3 hours ago
Jon CusterJon Custer
3,93121326
1
Journals aren't analogous because there's more scope for accepting "too many" papers today and dealing with the backlog tomorrow. Conferences are closer to a zero-sum game, where getting rid of competitors makes it more likely that your own paper will be accepted.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
@DavidRicherby - still it is a pretty close analog, perhaps less so now than in the old days of mail delivery of printed copies of journals. A finite number of papers are published a year. A 'conference proceedings' issue of a journal could often dwarf the rest of the journal's output that year, at least in the old days. The point is, your fellow attendees (and paper submitters) are the same folks as are publishing in your favorite journal(s).
– Jon Custer
2 hours ago
Sure but a journal can always accept your paper today and not actually print it for another three or four issues. It can also decide to print an extra issue to make up the backlog, of print fatter issues for a while. A conference doesn't have the option of saying "We're accepting your paper, but you can't present it until next year" and it has less scope for making the conference larger to accommodate more papers.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I see no reason why it would be a conflict of interest. An analogous question would be if there is a conflict of interest in you reviewing papers in a journal you might publish in. Given that other conference attendees are in the same/similar field as you, and are interested in a good conference, those attendees would seem to be the ideal group to pull reviewers from.
In conferences where I've seen the sausage being made, accepting to review gains no advantage. Refusing any and all review requests will ultimately be viewed as rude, but will not disadvantage you in having your paper accepted. (Invitations for invited talks and membership on the conference committee may well be hindered, however.)
answered 3 hours ago
Jon CusterJon Custer
3,93121326
I see no reason why it would be a conflict of interest. An analogous question would be if there is a conflict of interest in you reviewing papers in a journal you might publish in. Given that other conference attendees are in the same/similar field as you, and are interested in a good conference, those attendees would seem to be the ideal group to pull reviewers from.
In conferences where I've seen the sausage being made, accepting to review gains no advantage. Refusing any and all review requests will ultimately be viewed as rude, but will not disadvantage you in having your paper accepted. (Invitations for invited talks and membership on the conference committee may well be hindered, however.)
answered 3 hours ago
Jon CusterJon Custer
3,93121326
answered 3 hours ago
Jon CusterJon Custer
3,93121326
answered 3 hours ago
Jon CusterJon Custer
3,93121326
answered 3 hours ago
Jon CusterJon Custer
3,93121326
3,93121326
1
Journals aren't analogous because there's more scope for accepting "too many" papers today and dealing with the backlog tomorrow. Conferences are closer to a zero-sum game, where getting rid of competitors makes it more likely that your own paper will be accepted.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
@DavidRicherby - still it is a pretty close analog, perhaps less so now than in the old days of mail delivery of printed copies of journals. A finite number of papers are published a year. A 'conference proceedings' issue of a journal could often dwarf the rest of the journal's output that year, at least in the old days. The point is, your fellow attendees (and paper submitters) are the same folks as are publishing in your favorite journal(s).
– Jon Custer
2 hours ago
Sure but a journal can always accept your paper today and not actually print it for another three or four issues. It can also decide to print an extra issue to make up the backlog, of print fatter issues for a while. A conference doesn't have the option of saying "We're accepting your paper, but you can't present it until next year" and it has less scope for making the conference larger to accommodate more papers.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Journals aren't analogous because there's more scope for accepting "too many" papers today and dealing with the backlog tomorrow. Conferences are closer to a zero-sum game, where getting rid of competitors makes it more likely that your own paper will be accepted.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
@DavidRicherby - still it is a pretty close analog, perhaps less so now than in the old days of mail delivery of printed copies of journals. A finite number of papers are published a year. A 'conference proceedings' issue of a journal could often dwarf the rest of the journal's output that year, at least in the old days. The point is, your fellow attendees (and paper submitters) are the same folks as are publishing in your favorite journal(s).
– Jon Custer
2 hours ago
Sure but a journal can always accept your paper today and not actually print it for another three or four issues. It can also decide to print an extra issue to make up the backlog, of print fatter issues for a while. A conference doesn't have the option of saying "We're accepting your paper, but you can't present it until next year" and it has less scope for making the conference larger to accommodate more papers.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
1
1
Journals aren't analogous because there's more scope for accepting "too many" papers today and dealing with the backlog tomorrow. Conferences are closer to a zero-sum game, where getting rid of competitors makes it more likely that your own paper will be accepted.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
Journals aren't analogous because there's more scope for accepting "too many" papers today and dealing with the backlog tomorrow. Conferences are closer to a zero-sum game, where getting rid of competitors makes it more likely that your own paper will be accepted.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
@DavidRicherby - still it is a pretty close analog, perhaps less so now than in the old days of mail delivery of printed copies of journals. A finite number of papers are published a year. A 'conference proceedings' issue of a journal could often dwarf the rest of the journal's output that year, at least in the old days. The point is, your fellow attendees (and paper submitters) are the same folks as are publishing in your favorite journal(s).
– Jon Custer
2 hours ago
@DavidRicherby - still it is a pretty close analog, perhaps less so now than in the old days of mail delivery of printed copies of journals. A finite number of papers are published a year. A 'conference proceedings' issue of a journal could often dwarf the rest of the journal's output that year, at least in the old days. The point is, your fellow attendees (and paper submitters) are the same folks as are publishing in your favorite journal(s).
– Jon Custer
2 hours ago
Sure but a journal can always accept your paper today and not actually print it for another three or four issues. It can also decide to print an extra issue to make up the backlog, of print fatter issues for a while. A conference doesn't have the option of saying "We're accepting your paper, but you can't present it until next year" and it has less scope for making the conference larger to accommodate more papers.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
Sure but a journal can always accept your paper today and not actually print it for another three or four issues. It can also decide to print an extra issue to make up the backlog, of print fatter issues for a while. A conference doesn't have the option of saying "We're accepting your paper, but you can't present it until next year" and it has less scope for making the conference larger to accommodate more papers.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Assuming the papers are part of a blind peer-review process, I've never seen an example of this cited as a conflict of interest. Doesn't mean it isn't a potential conflict; I haven't come across this as such.
What would the conflict be in this regard? Are you worried about providing accurate feedback on papers? Usually, as a reviewer, there's a system in place whereby you're not just saying "yes" or "no" without giving written feedback.
answered 4 hours ago
PareverParever
16426
2
The conflict is that the asker can increase the chance of their own paper being accepted to the converence by giving a bad review to somebody else's paper.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Assuming the papers are part of a blind peer-review process, I've never seen an example of this cited as a conflict of interest. Doesn't mean it isn't a potential conflict; I haven't come across this as such.
What would the conflict be in this regard? Are you worried about providing accurate feedback on papers? Usually, as a reviewer, there's a system in place whereby you're not just saying "yes" or "no" without giving written feedback.
answered 4 hours ago
PareverParever
16426
2
The conflict is that the asker can increase the chance of their own paper being accepted to the converence by giving a bad review to somebody else's paper.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Assuming the papers are part of a blind peer-review process, I've never seen an example of this cited as a conflict of interest. Doesn't mean it isn't a potential conflict; I haven't come across this as such.
What would the conflict be in this regard? Are you worried about providing accurate feedback on papers? Usually, as a reviewer, there's a system in place whereby you're not just saying "yes" or "no" without giving written feedback.
answered 4 hours ago
PareverParever
16426
Assuming the papers are part of a blind peer-review process, I've never seen an example of this cited as a conflict of interest. Doesn't mean it isn't a potential conflict; I haven't come across this as such.
What would the conflict be in this regard? Are you worried about providing accurate feedback on papers? Usually, as a reviewer, there's a system in place whereby you're not just saying "yes" or "no" without giving written feedback.
answered 4 hours ago
PareverParever
16426
answered 4 hours ago
PareverParever
16426
answered 4 hours ago
PareverParever
16426
answered 4 hours ago
PareverParever
16426
16426
2
The conflict is that the asker can increase the chance of their own paper being accepted to the converence by giving a bad review to somebody else's paper.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
add a comment |
2
The conflict is that the asker can increase the chance of their own paper being accepted to the converence by giving a bad review to somebody else's paper.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
2
2
The conflict is that the asker can increase the chance of their own paper being accepted to the converence by giving a bad review to somebody else's paper.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
The conflict is that the asker can increase the chance of their own paper being accepted to the converence by giving a bad review to somebody else's paper.
– David Richerby
2 hours ago
add a comment |
I've reviewed for many CS conferences and never seen one that has a conflict of interest policy saying that people who've submitted a paper can't review. I'm sure I've reviewed papers for conferences I've submitted to. Yes, there is the slight conflict that a negative review for some other paper will likely mean a higher chance of yours being accepted, but it's going to look mighty suspicious if the reviews for a paper are "accept", "accept", "accept", "strong reject" and the "strong reject" just happens to come from a competitor.
I think I would decline to review a paper that was on a topic very close to my own submission because a positive review might be seen as "Oh, he's just hyping the subject so we think his own paper's awesome, too" and a negative review as "Oh, he's just trying to kill off the competition." At the very least, I'd check that the PC member who asked me to review was aware that I'd submitted a paper on the same topic. And you can always check that the PC member is happy for you to review.
answered 2 hours ago
David RicherbyDavid Richerby
29.6k661125
add a comment |
I've reviewed for many CS conferences and never seen one that has a conflict of interest policy saying that people who've submitted a paper can't review. I'm sure I've reviewed papers for conferences I've submitted to. Yes, there is the slight conflict that a negative review for some other paper will likely mean a higher chance of yours being accepted, but it's going to look mighty suspicious if the reviews for a paper are "accept", "accept", "accept", "strong reject" and the "strong reject" just happens to come from a competitor.
I think I would decline to review a paper that was on a topic very close to my own submission because a positive review might be seen as "Oh, he's just hyping the subject so we think his own paper's awesome, too" and a negative review as "Oh, he's just trying to kill off the competition." At the very least, I'd check that the PC member who asked me to review was aware that I'd submitted a paper on the same topic. And you can always check that the PC member is happy for you to review.
answered 2 hours ago
David RicherbyDavid Richerby
29.6k661125
add a comment |
I've reviewed for many CS conferences and never seen one that has a conflict of interest policy saying that people who've submitted a paper can't review. I'm sure I've reviewed papers for conferences I've submitted to. Yes, there is the slight conflict that a negative review for some other paper will likely mean a higher chance of yours being accepted, but it's going to look mighty suspicious if the reviews for a paper are "accept", "accept", "accept", "strong reject" and the "strong reject" just happens to come from a competitor.
I think I would decline to review a paper that was on a topic very close to my own submission because a positive review might be seen as "Oh, he's just hyping the subject so we think his own paper's awesome, too" and a negative review as "Oh, he's just trying to kill off the competition." At the very least, I'd check that the PC member who asked me to review was aware that I'd submitted a paper on the same topic. And you can always check that the PC member is happy for you to review.
answered 2 hours ago
David RicherbyDavid Richerby
29.6k661125
I've reviewed for many CS conferences and never seen one that has a conflict of interest policy saying that people who've submitted a paper can't review. I'm sure I've reviewed papers for conferences I've submitted to. Yes, there is the slight conflict that a negative review for some other paper will likely mean a higher chance of yours being accepted, but it's going to look mighty suspicious if the reviews for a paper are "accept", "accept", "accept", "strong reject" and the "strong reject" just happens to come from a competitor.
I think I would decline to review a paper that was on a topic very close to my own submission because a positive review might be seen as "Oh, he's just hyping the subject so we think his own paper's awesome, too" and a negative review as "Oh, he's just trying to kill off the competition." At the very least, I'd check that the PC member who asked me to review was aware that I'd submitted a paper on the same topic. And you can always check that the PC member is happy for you to review.
answered 2 hours ago
David RicherbyDavid Richerby
29.6k661125
answered 2 hours ago
David RicherbyDavid Richerby
29.6k661125
answered 2 hours ago
David RicherbyDavid Richerby
29.6k661125
answered 2 hours ago
David RicherbyDavid Richerby
29.6k661125
29.6k661125
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126053%2fbeing-asked-to-review-a-paper-in-conference-one-has-submitted-to%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
As another example, I just finished reviewing papers for CogSci 2019, and while I didn't submit, I know a few people who both reviewed and submitted. As far as I know, it's pretty common at conferences this large, and the sheer numbers involved--both in terms of total submissions, and variety of areas--make it extremely unlikely for you accepting a paper you reviewed to have any effect on the chances of your own paper getting accepted.
– twoblackboxes
3 hours ago