writing abstract call for papers

Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper

Definition and Purpose of Abstracts

An abstract is a short summary of your (published or unpublished) research paper, usually about a paragraph (c. 6-7 sentences, 150-250 words) long. A well-written abstract serves multiple purposes:

• an abstract lets readers get the gist or essence of your paper or article quickly, in order to decide whether to read the full paper;
• an abstract prepares readers to follow the detailed information, analyses, and arguments in your full paper;
• and, later, an abstract helps readers remember key points from your paper.

It’s also worth remembering that search engines and bibliographic databases use abstracts, as well as the title, to identify key terms for indexing your published paper. So what you include in your abstract and in your title are crucial for helping other researchers find your paper or article.

If you are writing an abstract for a course paper, your professor may give you specific guidelines for what to include and how to organize your abstract. Similarly, academic journals often have specific requirements for abstracts. So in addition to following the advice on this page, you should be sure to look for and follow any guidelines from the course or journal you’re writing for.

The Contents of an Abstract

Abstracts contain most of the following kinds of information in brief form. The body of your paper will, of course, develop and explain these ideas much more fully. As you will see in the samples below, the proportion of your abstract that you devote to each kind of information—and the sequence of that information—will vary, depending on the nature and genre of the paper that you are summarizing in your abstract. And in some cases, some of this information is implied, rather than stated explicitly. The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association , which is widely used in the social sciences, gives specific guidelines for what to include in the abstract for different kinds of papers—for empirical studies, literature reviews or meta-analyses, theoretical papers, methodological papers, and case studies.

Here are the typical kinds of information found in most abstracts:

• the context or background information for your research; the general topic under study; the specific topic of your research
• the central questions or statement of the problem your research addresses
• what’s already known about this question, what previous research has done or shown
• the main reason(s) , the exigency, the rationale , the goals for your research—Why is it important to address these questions? Are you, for example, examining a new topic? Why is that topic worth examining? Are you filling a gap in previous research? Applying new methods to take a fresh look at existing ideas or data? Resolving a dispute within the literature in your field? . . .
• your research and/or analytical methods
• your main findings , results , or arguments
• the significance or implications of your findings or arguments.

Your abstract should be intelligible on its own, without a reader’s having to read your entire paper. And in an abstract, you usually do not cite references—most of your abstract will describe what you have studied in your research and what you have found and what you argue in your paper. In the body of your paper, you will cite the specific literature that informs your research.

When to Write Your Abstract

Although you might be tempted to write your abstract first because it will appear as the very first part of your paper, it’s a good idea to wait to write your abstract until after you’ve drafted your full paper, so that you know what you’re summarizing.

What follows are some sample abstracts in published papers or articles, all written by faculty at UW-Madison who come from a variety of disciplines. We have annotated these samples to help you see the work that these authors are doing within their abstracts.

Choosing Verb Tenses within Your Abstract

The social science sample (Sample 1) below uses the present tense to describe general facts and interpretations that have been and are currently true, including the prevailing explanation for the social phenomenon under study. That abstract also uses the present tense to describe the methods, the findings, the arguments, and the implications of the findings from their new research study. The authors use the past tense to describe previous research.

The humanities sample (Sample 2) below uses the past tense to describe completed events in the past (the texts created in the pulp fiction industry in the 1970s and 80s) and uses the present tense to describe what is happening in those texts, to explain the significance or meaning of those texts, and to describe the arguments presented in the article.

The science samples (Samples 3 and 4) below use the past tense to describe what previous research studies have done and the research the authors have conducted, the methods they have followed, and what they have found. In their rationale or justification for their research (what remains to be done), they use the present tense. They also use the present tense to introduce their study (in Sample 3, “Here we report . . .”) and to explain the significance of their study (In Sample 3, This reprogramming . . . “provides a scalable cell source for. . .”).

Sample Abstract 1

From the social sciences.

Reporting new findings about the reasons for increasing economic homogamy among spouses

Gonalons-Pons, Pilar, and Christine R. Schwartz. “Trends in Economic Homogamy: Changes in Assortative Mating or the Division of Labor in Marriage?” Demography , vol. 54, no. 3, 2017, pp. 985-1005.

Sample Abstract 2

From the humanities.

Analyzing underground pulp fiction publications in Tanzania, this article makes an argument about the cultural significance of those publications

Emily Callaci. “Street Textuality: Socialism, Masculinity, and Urban Belonging in Tanzania’s Pulp Fiction Publishing Industry, 1975-1985.” Comparative Studies in Society and History , vol. 59, no. 1, 2017, pp. 183-210.

Sample Abstract/Summary 3

From the sciences.

Reporting a new method for reprogramming adult mouse fibroblasts into induced cardiac progenitor cells

Lalit, Pratik A., Max R. Salick, Daryl O. Nelson, Jayne M. Squirrell, Christina M. Shafer, Neel G. Patel, Imaan Saeed, Eric G. Schmuck, Yogananda S. Markandeya, Rachel Wong, Martin R. Lea, Kevin W. Eliceiri, Timothy A. Hacker, Wendy C. Crone, Michael Kyba, Daniel J. Garry, Ron Stewart, James A. Thomson, Karen M. Downs, Gary E. Lyons, and Timothy J. Kamp. “Lineage Reprogramming of Fibroblasts into Proliferative Induced Cardiac Progenitor Cells by Defined Factors.” Cell Stem Cell , vol. 18, 2016, pp. 354-367.

Sample Abstract 4, a Structured Abstract

Reporting results about the effectiveness of antibiotic therapy in managing acute bacterial sinusitis, from a rigorously controlled study

Note: This journal requires authors to organize their abstract into four specific sections, with strict word limits. Because the headings for this structured abstract are self-explanatory, we have chosen not to add annotations to this sample abstract.

Wald, Ellen R., David Nash, and Jens Eickhoff. “Effectiveness of Amoxicillin/Clavulanate Potassium in the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Sinusitis in Children.” Pediatrics , vol. 124, no. 1, 2009, pp. 9-15.

“OBJECTIVE: The role of antibiotic therapy in managing acute bacterial sinusitis (ABS) in children is controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of high-dose amoxicillin/potassium clavulanate in the treatment of children diagnosed with ABS.

METHODS : This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Children 1 to 10 years of age with a clinical presentation compatible with ABS were eligible for participation. Patients were stratified according to age (<6 or ≥6 years) and clinical severity and randomly assigned to receive either amoxicillin (90 mg/kg) with potassium clavulanate (6.4 mg/kg) or placebo. A symptom survey was performed on days 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 20, and 30. Patients were examined on day 14. Children’s conditions were rated as cured, improved, or failed according to scoring rules.

RESULTS: Two thousand one hundred thirty-five children with respiratory complaints were screened for enrollment; 139 (6.5%) had ABS. Fifty-eight patients were enrolled, and 56 were randomly assigned. The mean age was 6630 months. Fifty (89%) patients presented with persistent symptoms, and 6 (11%) presented with nonpersistent symptoms. In 24 (43%) children, the illness was classified as mild, whereas in the remaining 32 (57%) children it was severe. Of the 28 children who received the antibiotic, 14 (50%) were cured, 4 (14%) were improved, 4(14%) experienced treatment failure, and 6 (21%) withdrew. Of the 28children who received placebo, 4 (14%) were cured, 5 (18%) improved, and 19 (68%) experienced treatment failure. Children receiving the antibiotic were more likely to be cured (50% vs 14%) and less likely to have treatment failure (14% vs 68%) than children receiving the placebo.

CONCLUSIONS : ABS is a common complication of viral upper respiratory infections. Amoxicillin/potassium clavulanate results in significantly more cures and fewer failures than placebo, according to parental report of time to resolution.” (9)

Some Excellent Advice about Writing Abstracts for Basic Science Research Papers, by Professor Adriano Aguzzi from the Institute of Neuropathology at the University of Zurich:

Academic and Professional Writing

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Analysis Papers

Reading Poetry

A Short Guide to Close Reading for Literary Analysis

Using Literary Quotations

Play Reviews

Writing a Rhetorical Précis to Analyze Nonfiction Texts

Incorporating Interview Data

Grant Proposals

Planning and Writing a Grant Proposal: The Basics

Additional Resources for Grants and Proposal Writing

Job Materials and Application Essays

Writing Personal Statements for Ph.D. Programs

• Before you begin: useful tips for writing your essay
• Guided brainstorming exercises
• Get more help with your essay
• Frequently Asked Questions

Resume Writing Tips

CV Writing Tips

Cover Letters

Business Letters

Proposals and Dissertations

Resources for Proposal Writers

Resources for Dissertators

Research Papers

Planning and Writing Research Papers

Quoting and Paraphrasing

Writing Annotated Bibliographies

Creating Poster Presentations

Thank-You Notes

Advice for Students Writing Thank-You Notes to Donors

Reading for a Review

Critical Reviews

Writing a Review of Literature

Scientific Reports

Scientific Report Format

Sample Lab Assignment

Writing for the Web

Writing an Effective Blog Post

Writing for Social Media: A Guide for Academics

Department of History

• Why Study History?
• Undergraduate
• Think and Do
• Full Site Navigation
• Degree Programs
• Highlighted Courses
• Student Resources
• Undergraduate Advisors
• History Club
• Prospective Students
• Public History PhD Students
• Get Involved
• Graduate Resources
• Faculty Publications
• Digital Humanities
• Moise A. Khayrallah Center for Lebanese Diaspora Studies
• Brick By Brick Blog
• History Faculty Interview Series

Tips for Writing Conference Paper Abstracts

So you want to answer the Call for Papers? This is a general guide for crafting stand-out conference paper abstracts. It includes recommendations for the content and presentation of the abstract, as well as examples of the best abstracts submitted to the 2012-2013 abstract selection committee for the ninth annual North Carolina State University graduate student history conference.

Typically, an abstract describes the topic you would like to present at the conference, highlighting your argument, evidence and contribution to the historical literature. It is usually restricted to 250-500 words. The word limit can be challenging: some graduate students do not fret over the short limit and hastily write and submit an abstract at the last minute, which often hurts their chances of being accepted; other students try to condense the Next Great American Novel into 250 words, which can be equally damning. Graduate students who approach the abstract early, plan accordingly, and carefully edit are the ones most often invited to present their research. For those who are intimidated by the project, don’t be – the abstract is a fairly standardized form of writing. Follow the basic guidelines below and avoid common pitfalls and you will greatly improve your abstract.

Diligently follow all abstract style and formatting guidelines. Most CFPs will specify page or word length, and perhaps some layout or style guidelines. Some CFPs, however, will list very specific restrictions, including font, font size, spacing, text justification, margins, how to present quotes, how to present authors and works, whether to include footnotes or not. Make sure that you strictly adhere to all guidelines, including submission instructions. If a CFP does not provide abstract style and formatting guidelines, it is generally appropriate to stay around 250 words – abstract committees read a lot of these things and do not look fondly on comparatively long abstracts. Make sure that you orient your abstract topic to address any specific CFP themes, time periods, methods, and/or buzzwords.

With a 250-500 word limit, write only what is necessary, avoiding wordiness. Use active voice and pay attention to excessive prepositional phrasing.

Plan your abstract carefully before writing it. A good abstract will address the following questions:  What is the historical question or problem? Contextualize your topic. What is your thesis/argument? It should be original. What is your evidence? State forthrightly that you are using primary source material. How does your paper fit into the historiography? What's going on in the field of study and how does your paper contribute to it? Why does it matter? We know the topic is important to you, why should it be important to the abstract selection committee?

You should be as specific as possible, avoiding overly broad or overreaching statements and claims. And that’s it: don’t get sidetracked by writing too much narrative or over explaining. Say what you need to say and nothing more.

Keep your audience in mind. How much background you give on a topic will depend on the conference. Is the conference a general humanities conference, a general graduate student history conference, or something more specific like a 1960s social revolutions conference? Your pitch should be suited to the specificity of the conference: the more specific the topic, the less broad background you need to give and vice versa.

Revise and edit your abstract to ensure that its final presentation is error free. The editing phase is also the best time to see your abstract as a whole and chip away at unnecessary words or phrases. The final draft should be linear and clear and it should read smoothly. If you are tripping over something while reading, the abstract selection committee will as well. Ask another graduate student to read your abstract to ensure its clarity or attend a Graduate Student Writing Group meeting.

Your language should be professional and your style should adhere to academic standards. Contractions may be appealing because of the word limits, but they should be avoided. If citation guidelines are not specifically given, it is appropriate to use the author’s name and title of work (in either italics or quotation marks) within the text rather than use footnotes or in-text citations.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

Misusing questions.

While one question, if really good, may be posed in your abstract, you should avoid writing more than one (maybe two, if really really good). If you do pose a question or two, make sure that you either answer it or address why the question matters to your conference paper – unless you are posing an obvious rhetorical question, you should never just let a question hang there. Too many questions takes up too much space and leaves less room for you to develop your argument, methods, evidence, historiography, etc. Often times, posing too many questions leaves the abstract committee wondering if you are going to address one or all in your paper and if you even know the answers to them. Remember, you are not expected to have already written your conference paper, but you are expected to have done enough research that you are prepared to write about a specific topic that you can adequately cover in 15-20 minutes. Prove that you have done so.

Extraneous Jargon and Over-the-Top Phrasing

Language that helps you be as specific as possible in presenting your argument is great but don’t get your readers bogged down in jargon. They will be reading a lot of abstracts and will not want to wade through the unnecessary language. Keep it simple.

Repetition of Claims

When students repeat claims, they often don’t realize they are doing so. Sometimes this happens because students are not yet clear on their argument. Think about it some more and then write. Other times, students write carelessly and do not proofread. Make sure each sentence is unique and that it contributes to the flow of your abstract.

Writing too Broadly about a Topic

The abstract committee does not need to be reminded of the grand sweep of history in order to contextualize your topic. Place your topic specifically within the historiography.

The samples below represent the five highest scoring samples submitted to the selection committee for the ninth annual graduate student history conference, 2012-2013. Two of the samples below were subsequently selected for publication in the NC State Graduate Journal of History . Outstanding papers presented at the graduate student history conference are recommended for publication by panel commentators. Papers go through a peer review process before publication.

Sample 1: “Asserting Rights, Reclaiming Space: District of Marshpee v. Phineas Fish, 1833-1843”

From May of 1833 to March of 1834, the Mashpee Wampancag tribe of Cape Cod Massachusetts waged an aggressive campaign to gain political and religious autonomy from the state. In March of 1834, the Massachusetts legislature passed an act disbanding the white guardians appointed to conduct affairs for the Mashpee tribe and incorporated Mashpee as an Indian district. The Mashpee tribe's fight to restore self-government and control over land and resources represents a significant "recover of Native space." Equally significant is what happened once that space was recovered.

The topic of this paper addresses an understudied and essential period in the history of the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe. Despite a growing body of literature on the Mashpee, scholars largely neglect the period between 1834 and 1869. This paper looks as the Mashpee tribe's campaign to dismiss Harvard appointed minister Phineas Fish; the fight to regain the parsonage he occupied, its resources, and the community meetinghouse. This paper will argue the tribe asserted its power within the political and physical landscape to reclaim their meetinghouse and the parsonage land. Ultimately, this assertion contributed to shaping, strengthening, and remaking Mashpee community identity. This study examines legislative reports, petitions, letters, and legal documents to construct a narrative of Native agency in the antebellum period. [Note: This is part of my larger thesis project (in progress0 "Mashpee Wampanoag Government Formation and the Evolving Community Identity in the District of Marshpee, 1834-1849."]

Note: This paper, entitled " Testing Rights in Contested Space: The District of Marshpee versus Reverend Phineas Fish, 1833-1839 " was subsequently selected for publication in the NC State Graduate Journal of History .

Sample 2: “Private Paths to Public Places: Local Actors and the Creation of National Parklands in the American South”

This paper explores the connections between private individuals, government entities, and non-governmental organizations in the creation of parklands throughout the American South. While current historiography primarily credits the federal government with the creation of parks and protection of natural wonders, an investigation of parklands in the Southern United States reveals a reoccurring connection between private initiative and park creation. Secondary literature occasionally reflects the importance of local and non-government sources for the preservation of land, yet these works still emphasize the importance of a national bureaucracy setting the tone fore the parks movement. Some works, including Jacoby's Crimes Against Nature examine local actors, but focus on opposition to the imposition of new rules governing land in the face of some outside threat. In spite of scholarly recognition of non-government agencies and local initiative, the importance of local individuals in the creation of parklands remains and understudies aspect of American environmental history. Several examples in the American South raise concerns about the traditional narrative pitting governmental hegemony against local resistance. This paper argues for widespread, sustained interest in both nature preservation and in creating spaces for public recreation at the local level, and finds that the "private path to public parks" merits further investigation.

Note: This paper, entitled " Private Paths to Public Parks in the American South " was subsequently selected for publication in the NC State Graduate Journal of History .

Sample 3: Untitled

Previous generations of English Historians have produced a rich literature about the Levellers and their role in the English Civil Wars (1642-1649), primarily focused on the Putney Debates and their contributions to Anglophone legal and political thought. Typically, their push to extend the franchise and espousal of a theory of popular sovereignty has been central to accounts of Civil War radicalism. Other revisionist accounts depict them as a fragmented sect of millenarian radicals whose religious bent marginalized and possibility that they could make lasting contributions to English politics or society. This paper seeks to locate a Leveller theory of religious toleration, while explaining how their conception of political activity overlapped their religious ideas. Rather than focusing on John Lilburne, often taken as the public face of the Leveller movement, this paper will focus on the equally interesting and far more consistent thinker, William Walwyn. Surveying his personal background, published writings, popular involvement in the Leveller movement, and attacks launched by his critics, I hope to suggest that Walwyn's unique contribution to Anglophone political thought was his defense of religious pluralism in the face of violent sectarians who sought to wield control of the Church of England. Although the Levellers were ultimately suppressed, Walwyn's commitment to a tolerant society and a secular state should not be minimized but rather recognized as part of a larger debate about Church-State relations across early modern Europe. Ultimately this paper aims to contribute to the rich historiography of religious toleration and popular politics more broadly.

Sample 4: “Establishing a National Memory of Citizen Slaughter: A Case Study of the First Memory Site to Mass Murder in United States History - Edmond, Oklahoma, 1986-1989”

Since 1989, memory sites to events of mass murder have not only proliferated rapidly--they have become the normative expectation within American society. For the vast majority of American history, however, events commonly labeled as "mass murder" have resulted in no permanent memory sites and the sites of perpetration themselves have traditionally been either obliterated or rectified so that both the community and the nation could forget the tragedy and move on. This all changed on May 29, 1989 when the community of Edmond, Oklahoma officially dedicated the "Golden Ribbon" memorial to the thirteen people killed in the infamous "post office shooting" of 1986. In this paper I investigate the case of Edmond in order to understand why it became the first memory site of this kind in United States history. I argue that the small town of Edmond's unique political abnormalities on the day of the shooting, coupled with the near total community involvement established ideal conditions for the emergence of this unique type of memory site. I also conduct a historiography of the usage of "the ribbon" in order to illustrate how it has become the symbol of memories of violence and death in American society in the late 20th century. Lastly, I illustrate how the notable lack of communication between people involved in the Edmond and Oklahoma City cases after the 1995 Murrah Federal Building bombing--despite the close geographic and temporal proximity of these cases--illustrates this routinely isolated nature of commemorating mass murder and starkly renders the surprising number of aesthetic similarities that these memory sites share.

Sample 5: “Roman Urns and Sarcophagi: The Quest for Postmortem Identity during the Pax Romana”

"If you want to know who I am, the answer is ash and burnt embers;" thus read an anonymous early Roman's burial inscription. The Romans dealt with death in a variety of ways which incorporated a range of cultural conventions and beliefs--or non-beliefs as in the case of the "ash and embers." By the turn of the first century of this era, the Romans practiced cremation almost exclusively--as the laconic eloquence of the anonymous Roman also succinctly explained. Cremation vanished by the third century, replaced by the practice of the distant past by the fifth century. Burial first began to take hold in the western Roman Empire during the early second century, with the appearance of finely-crafted sarcophagi, but elites from the Roman world did not discuss the practices of cremation and burial in detail. Therefore archaeological evidence, primarily in form of burial vessels such as urns and sarcophagi represented the only place to turn to investigate the transitional to inhumation in the Roman world. This paper analyzed a small corpus of such vessels in order to identify symbolic elements which demarcate individual identities in death, comparing the patterns of these symbols to the fragments of text available relating to death in the Roman world. The analysis concluded that the transition to inhumantion was a movement caused by an increased desire on the part of Romans to preserve identity in death during and following the Pax Romana.

Selection of Papers

In general, the program committee evaluates the abstracts on the following basis:

• Intervention in the Historiography: Does the abstract ask new historical questions? Does the proposal provide new insights on familiar topics?
• Clarity of Presentation: Does the abstract clearly define the topic, scope, and methodologies?
• Argument: Does the abstract clearly lay out the historical argument?
• Style: Is the abstract free of grammatical errors, major spelling mistakes, or other problems that suggest the presenter may not be prepared to deliver a polished paper?

While the co-president of the HGSA organizes and facilitates the abstract selection committee each year and may change the selection process and methods, this rubric still represents a general guide for what a committee looks for when selecting conference participants. Selection is not a science, however: great abstracts are often not accepted because of panel design. It is unlikely, however, that poor abstracts will be selected to fill out panels.

Additional Resources

• Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences, Articles, and Books
• Guidelines for Writing Effective Abstracts for Conference Paper Presentations
• How to Write a Paper or Conference Proposal Abstract

• About the LSE Impact Blog
• Comments Policy
• Popular Posts
• Recent Posts
• Subscribe to the Impact Blog
• Write for us
• LSE comment

January 27th, 2015

How to write a killer conference abstract: the first step towards an engaging presentation..

34 comments | 133 shares

Estimated reading time: 6 minutes

Helen Kara responds to our previously published guide to writing abstracts and elaborates specifically on the differences for conference abstracts. She offers tips for writing an enticing abstract for conference organisers and an engaging conference presentation. Written grammar is different from spoken grammar. Remember that conference organisers are trying to create as interesting and stimulating an event as they can, and variety is crucial.

Enjoying this blogpost? 📨 Sign up to our  mailing list  and receive all the latest LSE Impact Blog news direct to your inbox.

The Impact blog has an  ‘essential ‘how-to’ guide to writing good abstracts’ . While this post makes some excellent points, its title and first sentence don’t differentiate between article and conference abstracts. The standfirst talks about article abstracts, but then the first sentence is, ‘Abstracts tend to be rather casually written, perhaps at the beginning of writing when authors don’t yet really know what they want to say, or perhaps as a rushed afterthought just before submission to a journal or a conference.’ This, coming so soon after the title, gives the impression that the post is about both article and conference abstracts.

I think there are some fundamental differences between the two. For example:

• Article abstracts are presented to journal editors along with the article concerned. Conference abstracts are presented alone to conference organisers. This means that journal editors or peer reviewers can say e.g. ‘great article but the abstract needs work’, while a poor abstract submitted to a conference organiser is very unlikely to be accepted.
• Articles are typically 4,000-8,000 words long. Conference presentation slots usually allow 20 minutes so, given that – for good listening comprehension – presenters should speak at around 125 words per minute, a conference presentation should be around 2,500 words long.
• Articles are written to be read from the page, while conference presentations are presented in person. Written grammar is different from spoken grammar, and there is nothing so tedious for a conference audience than the old-skool approach of reading your written presentation from the page. Fewer people do this now – but still, too many. It’s unethical to bore people! You need to engage your audience, and conference organisers will like to know how you intend to hold their interest.

Image credit:  allanfernancato  ( Pixabay, CC0 Public Domain )

The competition for getting a conference abstract accepted is rarely as fierce as the competition for getting an article accepted. Some conferences don’t even receive as many abstracts as they have presentation slots. But even then, they’re more likely to re-arrange their programme than to accept a poor quality abstract. And you can’t take it for granted that your abstract won’t face much competition. I’ve recently read over 90 abstracts submitted for the  Creative Research Methods conference in May  – for 24 presentation slots. As a result, I have four useful tips to share with you about how to write a killer conference abstract.

First , your conference abstract is a sales tool: you are selling your ideas, first to the conference organisers, and then to the conference delegates. You need to make your abstract as fascinating and enticing as possible. And that means making it different. So take a little time to think through some key questions:

• What kinds of presentations is this conference most likely to attract? How can you make yours different?
• What are the fashionable areas in your field right now? Are you working in one of these areas? If so, how can you make your presentation different from others doing the same? If not, how can you make your presentation appealing?

There may be clues in the call for papers, so study this carefully. For example, we knew that the  Creative Research Methods conference , like all general methods conferences, was likely to receive a majority of abstracts covering data collection methods. So we stated up front, in the call for papers, that we knew this was likely, and encouraged potential presenters to offer creative methods of planning research, reviewing literature, analysing data, writing research, and so on. Even so, around three-quarters of the abstracts we received focused on data collection. This meant that each of those abstracts was less likely to be accepted than an abstract focusing on a different aspect of the research process, because we wanted to offer delegates a good balance of presentations.

Currently fashionable areas in the field of research methods include research using social media and autoethnography/ embodiment. We received quite a few abstracts addressing these, but again, in the interests of balance, were only likely to accept one (at most) in each area. Remember that conference organisers are trying to create as interesting and stimulating an event as they can, and variety is crucial.

Second , write your abstract well. Unless your abstract is for a highly academic and theoretical conference, wear your learning lightly. Engaging concepts in plain English, with a sprinkling of references for context, is much more appealing to conference organisers wading through sheaves of abstracts than complicated sentences with lots of long words, definitions of terms, and several dozen references. Conference organisers are not looking for evidence that you can do really clever writing (save that for your article abstracts), they are looking for evidence that you can give an entertaining presentation.

Third , conference abstracts written in the future tense are off-putting for conference organisers, because they don’t make it clear that the potential presenter knows what they’ll be talking about. I was surprised by how many potential presenters did this. If your presentation will include information about work you’ll be doing in between the call for papers and the conference itself (which is entirely reasonable as this can be a period of six months or more), then make that clear. So, for example, don’t say, ‘This presentation will cover the problems I encounter when I analyse data with homeless young people, and how I solve those problems’, say, ‘I will be analysing data with homeless young people over the next three months, and in the following three months I will prepare a presentation about the problems we encountered while doing this and how we tackled those problems’.

Fourth , of course you need to tell conference organisers about your research: its context, method, and findings. It will also help enormously if you can take a sentence or three to explain what you intend to include in the presentation itself. So, perhaps something like, ‘I will briefly outline the process of participatory data analysis we developed, supported by slides. I will then show a two-minute video which will illustrate both the process in action and some of the problems encountered. After that, again using slides, I will outline each of the problems and how we tackled them in practice.’ This will give conference organisers some confidence that you can actually put together and deliver an engaging presentation.

So, to summarise, to maximise your chances of success when submitting conference abstracts:

• Make your abstract fascinating, enticing, and different.
• Write your abstract well, using plain English wherever possible.
• Don’t write in the future tense if you can help it – and, if you must, specify clearly what you will do and when.
• Explain your research, and also give an explanation of what you intend to include in the presentation.

While that won’t guarantee success, it will massively increase your chances. Best of luck!

This post originally appeared on the author’s personal blog and is reposted with permission.

Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the Impact of Social Science blog, nor of the London School of Economics. Please review our  Comments Policy  if you have any concerns on posting a comment below.

About the Author

Dr Helen Kara has been an independent social researcher in social care and health since 1999, and is an Associate Research Fellow at the Third Sector Research Centre , University of Birmingham. She is on the Board of the UK’s Social Research Association , with lead responsibility for research ethics. She also teaches research methods to practitioners and students, and writes on research methods. Helen is the author of Research and Evaluation for Busy Practitioners (2012) and Creative Research Methods in the Social Sciences (April 2015) , both published by Policy Press . She did her first degree in Social Psychology at the LSE.

About the author

Dr Helen Kara has been an independent researcher since 1999 and also teaches research methods and ethics. She is not, and never has been, an academic, though she has learned to speak the language. In 2015 Helen was the first fully independent researcher to be conferred as a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences. She is also an Honorary Senior Research Fellow at the Cathie Marsh Institute for Social Research, University of Manchester. She has written widely on research methods and ethics, including Research Ethics in the Real World: Euro-Western and Indigenous Perspectives (2018, Policy Press).

34 Comments

Personally, I’d rather not see reading a presentation written off so easily, for three off the cuff reasons:

1) Reading can be done really well, especially if the paper was written to be read.

2) It seems to be well suited to certain kinds of qualitative studies, particularly those that are narrative driven.

3) It seems to require a different kind of focus or concentration — one that requires more intensive listening (as opposed to following an outline driven presentation that’s supplemented with visuals, i.e., slides).

Admittedly, I’ve read some papers before, and writing them to be read can be a rewarding process, too. I had to pay attention to details differently: structure, tone, story, etc. It can be an insightful process, especially for works in progress.

Sean, thanks for your comment, which I think is a really useful addition to the discussion. I’ve sat through so many turgid not-written-to-be-read presentations that it never occurred to me they could be done well until I heard your thoughts. What you say makes a great deal of sense to me, particularly with presentations that are consciously ‘written to be read’ out loud. I think where they can get tedious is where a paper written for the page is read out loud instead, because for me that really doesn’t work. But I love to listen to stories, and I think of some of the quality storytelling that is broadcast on radio, and of audiobooks that work well (again, in my experience, they don’t all), and I do entirely see your point.

Helen, I appreciate your encouraging me remark on such a minor part of your post(!), which I enjoyed reading and will share. And thank you for the reply and the exchange on Twitter.

Very much enjoyed your post Helen. And your subsequent comments Sean. On the subject of the reading of a presentation. I agree that some people can write a paper specifically to be read and this can be done well. But I would think that this is a dying art. Perhaps in the humanities it might survive longer. Reading through the rest of your post I love the advice. I’m presenting at my first LIS conference next month and had I read your post first I probably would have written it differently. Advice for the future for me.

Martin – and Sean – thank you so much for your kind comments. Maybe there are steps we can take to keep the art alive; advocates for it, such as Sean, will no doubt help. And, Martin, if you’re presenting next month, you must have done perfectly well all by yourself! Congratulations on the acceptance, and best of luck for the presentation.

Great article! Obvious at it may seem, a point zero may be added before the other four: which _are_ your ideas?

A scientific writing coach told me she often runs a little exercise with her students. She tells them to put away their (journal) abstract and then asks them to summarize the bottom line in three statements. After some thinking, the students come up with an answer. Then the coach tells the students to reach for the abstract, read it and look for the bottom line they just summarised. Very often, they find that their own main observations and/or conclusions are not clearly expressed in the abstract.

PS I love the line “It’s unethical to bore people!” 🙂

Thanks for your comment, Olle – that’s a great point. I think something happens to us when we’re writing, in which we become so clear about what we want to say that we think we’ve said it even when we haven’t. Your friend’s exercise sounds like a great trick for finding out when we’ve done that. And thanks for the compliments, too!

• Pingback: How to write a conference abstract | Blog @HEC Paris Library
• Pingback: Writer’s Paralysis | Helen Kara
• Pingback: Weekend reads: - Retraction Watch at Retraction Watch
• Pingback: The Weekly Roundup | The Graduate School
• Pingback: My Top 10 Abstract Writing tips | Jon Rainford's Blog
• Pingback: Review of the Year 2015 | Helen Kara
• Pingback: Impact of Social Sciences – 2015 Year-In-Review: LSE Impact Blog’s Most Popular Posts

Thank you very much for the tips, they are really helpful. I have actually been accepted to present a PuchaKucha presentation in an educational interdisciplinary conference at my university. my presentation would be about the challenges faced by women in my country. So, it would be just a review of the literature. from what I’ve been reading, conferences are about new research and your new ideas… Is what I’m doing wrong??? that’s my first conference I’ll be speaking in and I’m afraid to ruin it!!! I will be really grateful about any advice ^_^

First of all: you’re not going to ruin the conference, even if you think you made a bad presentation. You should always remember that people are not very concerned about you–they are mostly concerned about themselves. Take comfort in that thought!

Here are some notes: • If it is a Pecha Kucha night, you stand in front of a mixed audience. Remember that scientists understand layman’s stuff, but laymen don’t understand scientists stuff. • Pecha Kucha is also very VISUAL! Remember that you can’t control the flow of slides – they change every 20 seconds. • Make your main messages clear. You can use either one of these templates.

A. Which are the THREE most important observations, conclusions, implications or messages from your study?

B. Inform them! (LOGOS) Engage them! (PATHOS) Make an impression! (ETHOS)

C. What do you do as a scientist/is a study about? What problem(s) do you address? How is your research different? Why should I care?

Good luck and remember to focus on (1) the audience, (2) your mission, (3) your stuff and (4) yourself, in that order.

• Pingback: How to choose a conference then write an abstract that gets you noticed | The Research Companion
• Pingback: Impact of Social Sciences – Impact Community Insights: Five things we learned from our Reader Survey and Google Analytics.
• Pingback: Giving Us The Space To Think Things Through… | Research Into Practice Group
• Pingback: The Scholar-Practitioner Paradox for Academic Writing [@BreakDrink Episode No. 8] – techKNOWtools

I don’t know whether it’s just me or if perhaps everybody else encountering problems with your site. It appears as if some of the text in your content are running off the screen. Can someone else please comment and let me know if this is happening to them as well? This could be a issue with my browser because I’ve had this happen before. Thank you

• Pingback: Exhibition, abstracts and a letter from Prince Harry – EAHIL 2018
• Pingback: How to write a great abstract | DEWNR-NRM-Science-Conference
• Pingback: Abstracting and postering for conferences – ECRAG

Thank you Dr Kara for the great guide on creating killer abstracts for conferences. I am preparing to write an abstract for my first conference presentation and this has been educative and insightful. ‘ I choose to be ethical and not bore my audience’.

Thank you Judy for your kind comment. I wish you luck with your abstract and your presentation. Helen

• Pingback: Tips to Write a Strong Abstract for a Conference Paper – Research Synergy Institute

Dear Dr. Helen Kara, Can there be an abstract for a topic presentation? I need to present a topic in a conference.I searched in the net and couldnt find anything like an abstract for a topic presentation but only found abstract for article presentation. Urgent.Help!

Dear Rekha Sthapit, I think it would be the same – but if in doubt, you could ask the conference organisers to clarify what they mean by ‘topic presentation’. Good luck!

• Pingback: 2020: The Top Posts of the Decade | Impact of Social Sciences
• Pingback: Capturing the abstract: what ARE conference abstracts and what are they FOR? (James Burford & Emily F. Henderson) – Conference Inference
• Pingback: LSEUPR 2022 Conference | LSE Undergraduate Political Review
• Pingback: New Occupational Therapy Research Conference: Integrating research into your role – Glasgow Caledonian University Occupational Therapy Blog

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Related Posts

‘It could be effective…’: Uncertainty and over-promotion in the abstracts of COVID-19 preprints

September 30th, 2021.

How to design an award-winning conference poster

May 11th, 2018.

Are scientific findings exaggerated? Study finds steady increase of superlatives in PubMed abstracts.

January 26th, 2016.

An antidote to futility: Why academics (and students) should take blogging / social media seriously

October 26th, 2015.

Visit our sister blog LSE Review of Books

Academic & Employability Skills

Subscribe to academic & employability skills.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 412 other subscribers.

Email Address

Writing an abstract - a six point checklist (with samples)

Posted in: abstract , dissertations

The abstract is a vital part of any research paper. It is the shop front for your work, and the first stop for your reader. It should provide a clear and succinct summary of your study, and encourage your readers to read more. An effective abstract, therefore should answer the following questions:

• Why did you do this study or project?
• What did you do and how?
• What did you find?
• What do your findings mean?

So here's our run down of the key elements of a well-written abstract.

• Size - A succinct and well written abstract should be between approximately 100- 250 words.
• Background - An effective abstract usually includes some scene-setting information which might include what is already known about the subject, related to the paper in question (a few short sentences).
• Purpose  - The abstract should also set out the purpose of your research, in other words, what is not known about the subject and hence what the study intended to examine (or what the paper seeks to present).
• Methods - The methods section should contain enough information to enable the reader to understand what was done, and how. It should include brief details of the research design, sample size, duration of study, and so on.
• Results - The results section is the most important part of the abstract. This is because readers who skim an abstract do so to learn about the findings of the study. The results section should therefore contain as much detail about the findings as the journal word count permits.
• Conclusion - This section should contain the most important take-home message of the study, expressed in a few precisely worded sentences. Usually, the finding highlighted here relates to the primary outcomes of the study. However, other important or unexpected findings should also be mentioned. It is also customary, but not essential, to express an opinion about the theoretical or practical implications of the findings, or the importance of their findings for the field. Thus, the conclusions may contain three elements:
• The primary take-home message.
• Any additional findings of importance.
• Implications for future studies.

Example Abstract 2: Engineering Development and validation of a three-dimensional finite element model of the pelvic bone.

Abstract from: Dalstra, M., Huiskes, R. and Van Erning, L., 1995. Development and validation of a three-dimensional finite element model of the pelvic bone. Journal of biomechanical engineering, 117(3), pp.272-278.

And finally...  A word on abstract types and styles

Abstract types can differ according to subject discipline. You need to determine therefore which type of abstract you should include with your paper. Here are two of the most common types with examples.

Informative Abstract

The majority of abstracts are informative. While they still do not critique or evaluate a work, they do more than describe it. A good informative abstract acts as a surrogate for the work itself. That is, the researcher presents and explains all the main arguments and the important results and evidence in the paper. An informative abstract includes the information that can be found in a descriptive abstract [purpose, methods, scope] but it also includes the results and conclusions of the research and the recommendations of the author. The length varies according to discipline, but an informative abstract is usually no more than 300 words in length.

Descriptive Abstract A descriptive abstract indicates the type of information found in the work. It makes no judgements about the work, nor does it provide results or conclusions of the research. It does incorporate key words found in the text and may include the purpose, methods, and scope of the research. Essentially, the descriptive abstract only describes the work being summarised. Some researchers consider it an outline of the work, rather than a summary. Descriptive abstracts are usually very short, 100 words or less.

Adapted from Andrade C. How to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation. Indian J Psychiatry. 2011 Apr;53(2):172-5. doi: 10.4103/0019-5545.82558. PMID: 21772657; PMCID: PMC3136027 .

Share this:

• Click to print (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)

Click here to cancel reply.

• Email * (we won't publish this)

Write a response

Navigating the dissertation process: my tips for final years

Imagine for a moment... After months of hard work and research on a topic you're passionate about, the time has finally come to click the 'Submit' button on your dissertation. You've just completed your longest project to date as part...

8 ways to beat procrastination

Whether you’re writing an assignment or revising for exams, getting started can be hard. Fortunately, there’s lots you can do to turn procrastination into action.

My takeaways on how to write a scientific report

If you’re in your dissertation writing stage or your course includes writing a lot of scientific reports, but you don’t quite know where and how to start, the Skills Centre can help you get started. I recently attended their ‘How...

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

5 Tips on How to Write a Call for Papers

3-minute read

• 22nd May 2020

A call for papers (CFP) is the document you send out when you are seeking academic papers for a conference, a special issue of a journal, or an edited volume. Here, we share five tips on how to write a call for papers.

1. Start with Information About the Event or Publication

First, you will want to describe what the conference or publication will be about. You will also want to set out some key information:

• For a conference, give the title, date, and location.
• For a special issue of a journal, name the journal, say who the editors are, and give the title of the issue.
• Similarly, for an edited volume , give its title and its editors.

This will give readers an immediate sense of whether the CFP is for them.

2. Describe What You Are Looking For

Next, make it clear what kind of papers you are looking for. To do this, describe the overall themes of the conference or publication and list the topics the editors or organizers are most interested in.

3. Explain the Submission Process

Usually, a call for papers will ask people to submit a proposal along with a CV or short biography. You should specify how long the proposal should be and what form it should take. For example, some CFPs ask for an abstract of around 250 words. It’s also a good idea to ask for CVs to be no more than one or two pages long, especially if you are expecting many submissions.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

In addition, you need to explain how people should submit their proposals – should they email them? Or is there an online form they should fill out?

4. State the Deadlines

Make sure you clearly state the deadlines for the submission of proposals and for the submission of the full conference paper, journal article, or chapter. This will help you to get proposals in on time, and it will help those reading the call for papers to decide whether they can make a submission.

5. Make Your Call for Papers Clear and Compelling

As academics are usually very busy, you are likely to receive more proposals if your call for papers gives clear information and has a straightforward submission process. And you might want to mention the importance of the conference or publication somewhere to encourage submissions.

We hope these tips help you to write a successful call for papers. And don’t forget: If you would like someone to check that your CFP is clear, concise, and error free, our expert editors can help.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

4-minute read

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

• Event Website Publish a modern and mobile friendly event website.
• Registration & Payments Collect registrations & online payments for your event.
• Abstract Management Collect and manage all your abstract submissions.
• Peer Reviews Easily distribute and manage your peer reviews.
• Conference Program Effortlessly build & publish your event program.
• Virtual Poster Sessions Host engaging virtual poster sessions.
• Customer Success Stories
• Wall of Love ❤️

Your Call for Papers Template (with Tips)

Published on 27 Apr 2022

So, you’re organizing an academic conference or a symposium. You’ve selected the conference date, you have your organizing committee in place, and you know the focus of your conference.

Now it’s time to gather the research papers that will be presented at your event.

An interesting, compelling call for papers is pivotal to attracting quality abstract submissions and ultimately peer-reviewed conference papers. After all, academics attend these events for valuable networking and learning opportunities, and if your conference does not present interesting speakers and subject-matter on the topics of interest, who will want to attend?

What is a Call for papers (CFP)?

A call for papers, or CFP, is a communication sent by a conference organizer to the academic community representing the event field of study, such as graduate students and researchers. This communication is usually an email, and its purpose is to encourage researchers to submit their work for review as an application to present at an upcoming research conference.

A well-executed call for papers or abstracts is an important part of conference planning. While these conferences are a great opportunity for researchers to present their work, it’s important to remember that with the rise in virtual conferences, there are more opportunities to participate in these events than before, with in-person conferences. Crafting an interesting, charismatic call for papers is a key strategy to attracting a good quantity of quality candidates to participate in your event. 

Organizing a conference?

How long should a call for papers be?

A call for papers is generally between 200 to 300 words. The messaging should be short, concise, and scannable. It should include key information and clear direction on the type of research the conference organizers are looking for, and nothing else.

Use bold, punchy headlines to grab the reader’s attention, letting them know what kind of content you’re looking for without making them have to concentrate on long-winded, fluffy language and instructions.

By also using subheadings and bullet points to compliment these headings, you can create a call for papers that is easy to read and well under that recommended 300-word maximum.

Make sure that your call for papers is simple, and does not use long, complicated terms or phrases. Yes, you are speaking to academics who are certainly capable of complex communications but remember that researchers have a lot of choices these days, so the simpler the better.

Call for Paper Template

Here is a handy template you can use for your next call for papers. For this example we’ll be using a fabricated conference called International Conference on Shared River Management in the Mekong Delta, taking place in Tel Aviv, Israel, in November 2022.

What sets this template apart from others you can find online? 

Most calls for papers are distributed via email. For those customizing the template above for their communications, we have provided an example of a strong, clear, 8-word subject line that follows well-established email subject line best practices , optimized to maximize the message open rates, or the number of recipients that actually open the message. In just 8 words, this subject line explains the intent of the email while complimenting the recipient by acknowledging their expertise. 

The content within the template is short – just over 200 words. It uses clear, simple language often communicated via bullet points, while still providing all the information the recipient needs in order to take the action intended by the conference organizers. 

It contains a helpful link to the submission portal so researchers don’t need to search out or maneuver a complicated application process – they can apply directly from the email.

It is formatted using visually attractive logos and typefaces, helping to set this call for papers apart from the rest. 

This template is available in Microsoft Word , Google Docs , and as a downloadable PDF . As the conference organizer, you can choose whether you want to attach the call for papers to the email invitation, or simply use it as the email body copy, removing a potential barrier for email recipients that may not have access to, or prefer not to use, the specific format attached.

How to craft your own call for papers

Crafting your own call for papers is easy! Just take the template provided above, and customize it with the information applicable to your event. You can even reuse it every year for annual conferences.

Step 1: Choose your communication method

Calls for papers are typically sent via email to all of the known academics in a certain field. Selecting an email platform to use is a decision for the organizing committee. While this decision is often influenced by the event budget, we recommend using an automated platform that integrates with your abstract management software and makes it easy to track email analytics to evaluate its success. 

Step 2: Tell them what you’re doing and why

You’ll see this in the main template heading where it says: Call for Papers: [Name of the conference]. 

In the template above, the conference name is part of the main header right next to the intent of the communication. This way, anyone reading this call for papers is aware of what is being asked, and for what, right from the headline. 

Step 3: Include the time and place

Even if the specific event venue has not yet been confirmed, make sure your call for papers includes the event date and the city where it will be hosted. This gives potential applicants enough information to determine if they’re available to participate. 

Step 5: Share a link to your website

Part of keeping your call for papers short is making sure it only contains essential details. By linking to the event website , you are giving potential applicants the opportunity to learn more about your event, without cluttering up your message. 

Step 6: Introduce the event

Provide a brief, interesting introduction to the event, referencing the researcher as an identified expert in the field, and briefly describing the benefits of participating. 

Step 7: Share important dates

Be transparent about when submissions are due and how long they should take to review. Let applicants know when they can expect to hear back, and hold yourself accountable to meet that deadline. 

Step 8: Make it easy to apply

Make sure your call for papers includes a simple, direct connection to the portal that accepts paper submissions. Remember that researchers have options these days, and it’s always best to be the option that makes things easier, rather than more complicated. 

Step 9: Be clear about any guidelines

Is there a word limit for your submissions? Are there any topics that are strongly encouraged? Any that are strictly off-limits? Provide all of this information right in the call for papers, and avoid wasting your own time reviewing submissions that don’t fit your requirements, or wasting the applicant’s time in submitting work that’s not what you’re looking for. 

Step 10: Define your review process

There are many ways of reviewing conference submissions, and there are many opinions and preferences in the academic world. Be upfront about the review process and methodologies selected for your conference so researchers are aware of how their work will be evaluated.

Step 11: Invite further communication

Make it clear that researchers can easily connect with the event organizing committee if they have any questions about the application process, or the event itself. You can also add information about if the final full papers will be included in the Conference Proceedings or how you will reach out to the ones who submitted the accepted papers.

A successful call for papers is a cornerstone of a great academic conference. When crafting this communication, remember to try and keep it short, direct, light, and fun, regardless of the conference subject matter.

It’s difficult to attract research submissions if the submission request is boring and clunky. Make it easy to access all the information researchers need and ensure that the application process is simple, the review process is transparent, and the applicant knows what to expect in terms of further communications.

Once the call for papers is shared, a good abstract submission solution will ensure the next steps flow smoothly.

5 Best Event Registration Platforms for Your Next Conference

By having one software to organize registrations and submissions, a pediatric health center runs aro...

5 Essential Conference Apps for Your Event

In today’s digital age, the success of any conference hinges not just on the content and speakers bu...

• Event Content Pros '24
• Request a demo

The Ultimate Call for Papers Email Template to Attract High Quality Speakers

Stop getting ghosted 👻 by your dream speakers. Get this free email template to drive more submissions.

Crafting a high-converting subject line for your call for papers is just half the battle.

You've got your speaker's attention, now how are you going to keep it?

Ensuring your call for speakers outreach is clear in context and easy in execution is critical to attract the caliber of talent you're looking for. 

In this blog, we'll share some quick tips to improve your call for speakers email content plus a high-converting email template to generate buzz and maximize submissions. 

Seven Quick Tips for Writing a High-Converting Call for Papers Email

Want to stop getting ghosted 👻 by your dream speakers? Consider these seven simple tips to ensure you can capture their attention, and keep it. 👀

• Don't be afraid to show off a bit. Highlight past high-caliber speakers, showcase the valuable networking opportunities, or celebrate the size and exposure of your conference. Think of this as an "elevator pitch" for your event. Make it clear and compelling as to what's in it for them.  If you have a video recap or "highlight reel" from the years prior, link it in the email—show them what they'd be missing, don't tell. 2. Be clear & concise. Outside of the catchy introduction - you want to maximize every word of your call for papers to make the ask as clear as possible. But how much, is too much? At a minimum you need to include the following details: - The name of the conference - The conference date & location - A link to the conference website - A list of key topics/content tracks - A link to common FAQs about the conference 3. Be upfront about the time commitment for the submission. Your goal should be to strike a balance of brevity and clarity in this first email. After you hook them and set clear expectations, be sure to give a time estimate to avoid potential frustration. Don't promise five minutes when it really takes 20. Transparency here will prevent speakers from abandoning the submission process.  4. Break up the formatting. Use bold, underline, *asterisks*, sizing and CAPS to your advantage. Choppy copy converts - write the email with "skimmability" in mind. Using simple text breaks, , sizing changes, bolding, and typeface can make a big difference (as you'll see in the template.) 5. Provide the submission guidelines, restrictions and formats. It's important to provide more than just deadlines here. Be sure to reiterate content topics/themes as well as the different types of session formats they can choose (i.e. video, workshop, presentation, panel, virtual, in-person, etc.). Additionally, you will want to clarify word count restrictions and touch on any rules or regulations specific to the submission. Be sure to give three distinct deadlines - a submit deadline, an evaluation deadline and an approval deadline.  6. Create a FAQ page and link it in the email. Map all of the common questions or objectives you've received from speakers over the years and create a helpful FAQ page to set the record straight. Or, go through the call for papers process yourself - notice any gaps or questions you have along the way and use the FAQs to supplement. This will save your team hours answering the same questions multiple times and provide your speakers with one central location to get answers they need, instantly. It's a win-win. Some organizations like TED develop dedicated speaker guides to provide the "do's and don'ts" for how to give an effective talk or session. 7. Include clear contact information. Beyond the FAQ page (which should mitigate a bulk of requests) you need to provide speakers with a clear point of contact. Try to keep this to one POC if possible and match the email sender name to the POC name if possible. This will build consistency and begin to establish that relationship early on.

The Ultimate Call for Speakers Email Template—Start Driving Top Notch Submissions Today

Now that you have the framework for the email content, it's time to start sending. Use the outline above as a guide, or simply copy and paste the free email template below. Make some quick tweaks to reflect your upcoming event details, and fire away!

Conference Name: 2022 Product Marketing Strategies Summit

Date: October 22 - 24, 2022

Location: Nashville, TN

Call for Papers NOW OPEN 🎉 Submit your abstract to speak today.

Since its inception in 2020, the Product Marketing Strategies Summit has been the go-to event for leaders in product growth and innovation.

With more than 8,000 attendees and 500 world-renowned speakers , the annual Product Marketing Summit unites our community to connect, educate, inspire and grow. We are honored to invite you to submit a proposal to share your expertise with our community.

The conference will take place in Nashville, TN from October 22-24, 2022. The theme this year is focused on growth and innovation across four key areas—people, strategy, technology and creativity. Below are all of the details and deadlines you need to submit your abstract, the process should take no more than 30 minutes. 

HOW TO SUBMIT YOUR ABSTRACT

**DEADLINE TO SUBMIT: August 1, 2022**

To submit your abstract, please click on the following link. It should take you 30 minutes or less to complete to submission.

*IMPORTANT* - please note that submissions can be no longer than 250 words. Submit Deadline Evaluation Deadline Approval Deadline

TOPIC TRACKS TO CHOOSE FROM

• People Track - Advice on hiring (and keeping) top talent in today's market
• Strategy Track - Cutting edge strategies & tactics to keep pace with the ever-changing landscape
• Data & Technology Track - How to craft a tech stack that delivers and measure the impact of product marketing through data
• Creative Track - How to use customer insights for more creative campaigns and branding opportunities

DEADLINES FOR ABSTRACT SUBMISSION

• Submit Deadline: The deadline to submit your abstract is August 1, 2022.
• Evaluation Deadline: Your submission will be evaluated by August 15, 2022.
• Approval Deadline: Your submission will be approved or denied by August 22, 2022.

FAQs ABOUT SPEAKING

Got questions? We have answers. Visit our speaker FAQ center so you don't miss a beat.

YOUR POINT OF CONTACT

For any inquiries regarding the submission process, please contact me directly at [email protected].

We look forward to seeing you speak at the 2022 Product Marketing Strategies Summit.

Erin Chesterton

Latest articles.

Emerald Partners with Sessionboard to Streamline Speaker and Session Management

Conditional Logic 2.0 - Sessionboard Product Update

Reflecting on Brunch with Denver's Top Event Professionals: A "Sessions" Local Edition

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Main Navigation

• Contact NeurIPS
• Code of Ethics
• Code of Conduct
• Create Profile
• Journal To Conference Track
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Proceedings
• Future Meetings
• Exhibitor Information
• Privacy Policy

NeurIPS 2024

Conference Dates: (In person) 9 December - 15 December, 2024

Homepage: https://neurips.cc/Conferences/2024/

Call For Papers 

Abstract submission deadline: May 15, 2024

Author notification: Sep 25, 2024

Camera-ready, poster, and video submission: Oct 30, 2024 AOE

Submit at: https://openreview.net/group?id=NeurIPS.cc/2024/Conference  

The site will start accepting submissions on Apr 22, 2024 

Subscribe to these and other dates on the 2024 dates page .

The Thirty-Eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2024) is an interdisciplinary conference that brings together researchers in machine learning, neuroscience, statistics, optimization, computer vision, natural language processing, life sciences, natural sciences, social sciences, and other adjacent fields. We invite submissions presenting new and original research on topics including but not limited to the following:

• Applications (e.g., vision, language, speech and audio, Creative AI)
• Deep learning (e.g., architectures, generative models, optimization for deep networks, foundation models, LLMs)
• Evaluation (e.g., methodology, meta studies, replicability and validity, human-in-the-loop)
• General machine learning (supervised, unsupervised, online, active, etc.)
• Infrastructure (e.g., libraries, improved implementation and scalability, distributed solutions)
• Machine learning for sciences (e.g. climate, health, life sciences, physics, social sciences)
• Neuroscience and cognitive science (e.g., neural coding, brain-computer interfaces)
• Optimization (e.g., convex and non-convex, stochastic, robust)
• Probabilistic methods (e.g., variational inference, causal inference, Gaussian processes)
• Reinforcement learning (e.g., decision and control, planning, hierarchical RL, robotics)
• Social and economic aspects of machine learning (e.g., fairness, interpretability, human-AI interaction, privacy, safety, strategic behavior)
• Theory (e.g., control theory, learning theory, algorithmic game theory)

Machine learning is a rapidly evolving field, and so we welcome interdisciplinary submissions that do not fit neatly into existing categories.

Authors are asked to confirm that their submissions accord with the NeurIPS code of conduct .

Formatting instructions:   All submissions must be in PDF format, and in a single PDF file include, in this order:

• The submitted paper
• Technical appendices that support the paper with additional proofs, derivations, or results 
• The NeurIPS paper checklist  

Other supplementary materials such as data and code can be uploaded as a ZIP file

The main text of a submitted paper is limited to nine content pages , including all figures and tables. Additional pages containing references don’t count as content pages. If your submission is accepted, you will be allowed an additional content page for the camera-ready version.

The main text and references may be followed by technical appendices, for which there is no page limit.

The maximum file size for a full submission, which includes technical appendices, is 50MB.

Authors are encouraged to submit a separate ZIP file that contains further supplementary material like data or source code, when applicable.

You must format your submission using the NeurIPS 2024 LaTeX style file which includes a “preprint” option for non-anonymous preprints posted online. Submissions that violate the NeurIPS style (e.g., by decreasing margins or font sizes) or page limits may be rejected without further review. Papers may be rejected without consideration of their merits if they fail to meet the submission requirements, as described in this document. 

Paper checklist: In order to improve the rigor and transparency of research submitted to and published at NeurIPS, authors are required to complete a paper checklist . The paper checklist is intended to help authors reflect on a wide variety of issues relating to responsible machine learning research, including reproducibility, transparency, research ethics, and societal impact. The checklist forms part of the paper submission, but does not count towards the page limit.

Please join the NeurIPS 2024 Checklist Assistant Study that will provide you with free verification of your checklist performed by an LLM here . Please see details in our  blog

Supplementary material: While all technical appendices should be included as part of the main paper submission PDF, authors may submit up to 100MB of supplementary material, such as data, or source code in a ZIP format. Supplementary material should be material created by the authors that directly supports the submission content. Like submissions, supplementary material must be anonymized. Looking at supplementary material is at the discretion of the reviewers.

We encourage authors to upload their code and data as part of their supplementary material in order to help reviewers assess the quality of the work. Check the policy as well as code submission guidelines and templates for further details.

Use of Large Language Models (LLMs): We welcome authors to use any tool that is suitable for preparing high-quality papers and research. However, we ask authors to keep in mind two important criteria. First, we expect papers to fully describe their methodology, and any tool that is important to that methodology, including the use of LLMs, should be described also. For example, authors should mention tools (including LLMs) that were used for data processing or filtering, visualization, facilitating or running experiments, and proving theorems. It may also be advisable to describe the use of LLMs in implementing the method (if this corresponds to an important, original, or non-standard component of the approach). Second, authors are responsible for the entire content of the paper, including all text and figures, so while authors are welcome to use any tool they wish for writing the paper, they must ensure that all text is correct and original.

Double-blind reviewing:   All submissions must be anonymized and may not contain any identifying information that may violate the double-blind reviewing policy.  This policy applies to any supplementary or linked material as well, including code.  If you are including links to any external material, it is your responsibility to guarantee anonymous browsing.  Please do not include acknowledgements at submission time. If you need to cite one of your own papers, you should do so with adequate anonymization to preserve double-blind reviewing.  For instance, write “In the previous work of Smith et al. [1]…” rather than “In our previous work [1]...”). If you need to cite one of your own papers that is in submission to NeurIPS and not available as a non-anonymous preprint, then include a copy of the cited anonymized submission in the supplementary material and write “Anonymous et al. [1] concurrently show...”). Any papers found to be violating this policy will be rejected.

OpenReview: We are using OpenReview to manage submissions. The reviews and author responses will not be public initially (but may be made public later, see below). As in previous years, submissions under review will be visible only to their assigned program committee. We will not be soliciting comments from the general public during the reviewing process. Anyone who plans to submit a paper as an author or a co-author will need to create (or update) their OpenReview profile by the full paper submission deadline. Your OpenReview profile can be edited by logging in and clicking on your name in https://openreview.net/ . This takes you to a URL "https://openreview.net/profile?id=~[Firstname]_[Lastname][n]" where the last part is your profile name, e.g., ~Wei_Zhang1. The OpenReview profiles must be up to date, with all publications by the authors, and their current affiliations. The easiest way to import publications is through DBLP but it is not required, see FAQ . Submissions without updated OpenReview profiles will be desk rejected. The information entered in the profile is critical for ensuring that conflicts of interest and reviewer matching are handled properly. Because of the rapid growth of NeurIPS, we request that all authors help with reviewing papers, if asked to do so. We need everyone’s help in maintaining the high scientific quality of NeurIPS.  

Please be aware that OpenReview has a moderation policy for newly created profiles: New profiles created without an institutional email will go through a moderation process that can take up to two weeks. New profiles created with an institutional email will be activated automatically.

Venue home page: https://openreview.net/group?id=NeurIPS.cc/2024/Conference

If you have any questions, please refer to the FAQ: https://openreview.net/faq

Abstract Submission: There is a mandatory abstract submission deadline on May 15, 2024, six days before full paper submissions are due. While it will be possible to edit the title and abstract until the full paper submission deadline, submissions with “placeholder” abstracts that are rewritten for the full submission risk being removed without consideration. This includes titles and abstracts that either provide little or no semantic information (e.g., "We provide a new semi-supervised learning method.") or describe a substantively different claimed contribution.  The author list cannot be changed after the abstract deadline. After that, authors may be reordered, but any additions or removals must be justified in writing and approved on a case-by-case basis by the program chairs only in exceptional circumstances. 

Ethics review: Reviewers and ACs may flag submissions for ethics review . Flagged submissions will be sent to an ethics review committee for comments. Comments from ethics reviewers will be considered by the primary reviewers and AC as part of their deliberation. They will also be visible to authors, who will have an opportunity to respond.  Ethics reviewers do not have the authority to reject papers, but in extreme cases papers may be rejected by the program chairs on ethical grounds, regardless of scientific quality or contribution.  

Preprints: The existence of non-anonymous preprints (on arXiv or other online repositories, personal websites, social media) will not result in rejection. If you choose to use the NeurIPS style for the preprint version, you must use the “preprint” option rather than the “final” option. Reviewers will be instructed not to actively look for such preprints, but encountering them will not constitute a conflict of interest. Authors may submit anonymized work to NeurIPS that is already available as a preprint (e.g., on arXiv) without citing it. Note that public versions of the submission should not say "Under review at NeurIPS" or similar.

Dual submissions: Submissions that are substantially similar to papers that the authors have previously published or submitted in parallel to other peer-reviewed venues with proceedings or journals may not be submitted to NeurIPS. Papers previously presented at workshops are permitted, so long as they did not appear in a conference proceedings (e.g., CVPRW proceedings), a journal or a book.  NeurIPS coordinates with other conferences to identify dual submissions.  The NeurIPS policy on dual submissions applies for the entire duration of the reviewing process.  Slicing contributions too thinly is discouraged.  The reviewing process will treat any other submission by an overlapping set of authors as prior work. If publishing one would render the other too incremental, both may be rejected.

Anti-collusion: NeurIPS does not tolerate any collusion whereby authors secretly cooperate with reviewers, ACs or SACs to obtain favorable reviews. 

Author responses:   Authors will have one week to view and respond to initial reviews. Author responses may not contain any identifying information that may violate the double-blind reviewing policy. Authors may not submit revisions of their paper or supplemental material, but may post their responses as a discussion in OpenReview. This is to reduce the burden on authors to have to revise their paper in a rush during the short rebuttal period.

After the initial response period, authors will be able to respond to any further reviewer/AC questions and comments by posting on the submission’s forum page. The program chairs reserve the right to solicit additional reviews after the initial author response period.  These reviews will become visible to the authors as they are added to OpenReview, and authors will have a chance to respond to them.

After the notification deadline, accepted and opted-in rejected papers will be made public and open for non-anonymous public commenting. Their anonymous reviews, meta-reviews, author responses and reviewer responses will also be made public. Authors of rejected papers will have two weeks after the notification deadline to opt in to make their deanonymized rejected papers public in OpenReview.  These papers are not counted as NeurIPS publications and will be shown as rejected in OpenReview.

Publication of accepted submissions:   Reviews, meta-reviews, and any discussion with the authors will be made public for accepted papers (but reviewer, area chair, and senior area chair identities will remain anonymous). Camera-ready papers will be due in advance of the conference. All camera-ready papers must include a funding disclosure . We strongly encourage accompanying code and data to be submitted with accepted papers when appropriate, as per the code submission policy . Authors will be allowed to make minor changes for a short period of time after the conference.

Contemporaneous Work: For the purpose of the reviewing process, papers that appeared online within two months of a submission will generally be considered "contemporaneous" in the sense that the submission will not be rejected on the basis of the comparison to contemporaneous work. Authors are still expected to cite and discuss contemporaneous work and perform empirical comparisons to the degree feasible. Any paper that influenced the submission is considered prior work and must be cited and discussed as such. Submissions that are very similar to contemporaneous work will undergo additional scrutiny to prevent cases of plagiarism and missing credit to prior work.

Plagiarism is prohibited by the NeurIPS Code of Conduct .

Other Tracks: Similarly to earlier years, we will host multiple tracks, such as datasets, competitions, tutorials as well as workshops, in addition to the main track for which this call for papers is intended. See the conference homepage for updates and calls for participation in these tracks. 

Experiments: As in past years, the program chairs will be measuring the quality and effectiveness of the review process via randomized controlled experiments. All experiments are independently reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB).

Financial Aid: Each paper may designate up to one (1) NeurIPS.cc account email address of a corresponding student author who confirms that they would need the support to attend the conference, and agrees to volunteer if they get selected. To be considered for Financial the student will also need to fill out the Financial Aid application when it becomes available.

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Open call for papers.

Looking to publish in a Special Issue for even more impact? Our website is regularly updated with the latest general and special issue call for papers across our Social Science, Humanities, Science, Technology, and Medicine journals. Make sure you read the relevant journal’s Aims & Scope and Manuscript Submission Guidelines before submitting and contact the journal’s editorial office with any queries about your article. If you have any questions about publishing with Sage, please visit the Sage Journal Solutions Portal .

Browse the Open Call for Papers in your relevant discipline

Business & management, clinical medicine and surgery, communication & media studies and language & linguistics, health & nursing, material science & engineering, politics, public administration & international relations, psychology & counseling, public health.

Interested in becoming a Sage Guest Editor in an Open Access Journal?

Learn more about submitting a proposal for serving as Guest Editor for a Special Collection in a Sage Open Access journal.

Business and Professional Communication Quarterly

• Positive Communication Scholarship of Teaching and Learning   – d eadline Sep 15, 2024

Public Finance and Management

• Symposium Issue – Application of Blockchain Technology in PFM – deadline for abstracts April 30, 2024
• Symposium Issue—Budgeting Mechanisms and Behaviors  – deadline for manuscripts July 1, 2024 

Journal of Interactive Marketing

• Intelligent Automation and AI  – d eadline Aug 31, 2024
• Brands and Branding in the Metaverse  – deadline May 31, 2024

Journal of Tropical Futures: Sustainable Business, Governance & Development

• General call for papers
• Novel Approaches to Sustainable Consumption and Production in the Global South: From Challenging Dominant Assumptions to Setting Future Debates – deadline July 8, 2024
• Environmental Justice and Corporate Social Responsibility in the Tropics  – deadline Sep 2, 2024

Journal of Macromarketing

• Embracing Healthy Ageing in Marketing  – d eadline Aug 31, 2024
• Futurology and Macromarketing   – d eadline Aug 30, 2024
• Innovations in Data-Driven Macromarketing and Transformative Technologies: Empowering the Future   – d eadline Sep 30, 2024

Social Marketing Quarterly

• Social Marketing’s Role in Racial Equity  – ongoing
• Social Marketing and the Sustainable Development Goals   – d eadline Aug 31, 2024

Journal of Marketing

• Expanding the Boundaries: Marketing as a Multidisciplinary Knowledge Creation Engine  – ongoing

Cleft Palate Craniofacial Journal

• Spotlight on Early-Career Researchers of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association – Deadline June 1, 2024

Progress in Transplantation

• Amplifying the Patient Voice in Research and Healthcare  – Deadline August 1, 2024

Wilderness & Environmental Medicine

• Space Medicine & Health Systems  – Deadline June 1, 2024

The American Journal of Cosmetic Surgery

• General Call for Papers  – ongoing
• International Special Issue Series  – ongoing

Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery

Journal of Dance Medicine & Science

Journal of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis

Journal of VitreoRetinal Diseases

Seminars in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia

Emerging Media

• AI from a Human and Responsible Perspective  – Deadline April 30, 2024
• Decolonising Media Futures  – Deadline September 15, 2024

Journal of Chinese Writing Systems

• Naxi Manuscripts  – deadline 10-Jan-2024 for abstract, 30-Jun-2024 for submission

Journal of Transformative Education

• Call for Proposals: Exploring Transformative Learning Theory in Asian Contexts  – D eadline June 30, 2024

Journal of Advanced Academics

• Call for Proposals  – Deadline July 31, 2024
• General Call for Papers  – Deadline December 31, 2024

Journal of Interpretation Research

• Call for Abstracts: Interpreting the Leave No Trace program: Lessons from 30 years of public education  – Deadline August 15, 2024

ECNU Review of Education

• Understanding What Mathematics Teachers Notice in Instruction: A Cross-Cultural Dialogue Between East and West  – deadline 15-Nov-2023 for abstract, 31-Mar-2024 for submission

Asian Journal for Mathematics Education

Gifted Child Today

• General Call for Papers – ongoing

Creative Nursing

• Activism, Advocacy, and Allyship  – deadline TBD
• Social Media and Artificial Intelligence  – deadline TBD
• Social Violence  – deadline TBD
• Transforming Power Over to Power With  – deadline TBD

Evaluation & the Health Professions

Hispanic Health Care International

Journal of Human Lactation

• State of the Science  – deadline May 1, 2024

Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association

• Workplace Violence  – deadline July 31, 2024

NASN School Nurse

New Solutions

• COVID-19 and the Workplace: Risk Factors and Solutions  – ongoing
• Restoring Science and Reconstructing the Regulatory State  – ongoing
• Racial Justice and Workplace and Environmental Health Equity  – ongoing

European Journal of Mass Spectrometry

Brain Science Advances

• The Application of Big Data Models in Brain Science   – deadline July 31, 2024

Clinical EEG and Neuroscience

• Commemorating the 100th year anniversary of EEG –  articles will be accepted on a rolling basis until early 2029

Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology

• General Call for Papers   – ongoing

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair

Chinese Journal of Transnational Law

• Private International Law and Sustainable Development in Asia  – deadline 20-Feb-2024 for abstract, 1-Oct-2024 for submission

Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology

• Unpacking Economic Inequality: A Psychological Perspective  – Proposal deadline: Sep 9, 2024; Manuscript deadline: Jan 10, 2025

Journal of Prevention and Health Promotion

• Special Issue: Harm Reduction Strategies to Address Substance Misuse and the Associated Challenges  – deadline July 31, 2024

Emerging Adulthood

• General Call for Papers  – deadline June 1, 2024

Perceptual and Motor Skills 

• Special Issue: The Role of Psycho-Affective Factors in Second/Foreign Language Learning  – deadline September 15, 2024

Illness, Crisis & Loss 

• Special Issue: Public Dying and Public Grieving  – deadline Feb 10, 2024

Food and Nutrition Bulletin

Health Promotion Practice

International Journal of Social Determinants of Health and Health Services

• Special Sections  – ongoing

Medical Decision Making

• Interface between Human Users and Machine Learning Models in Medical Decision Making  – ongoing

Sociology of Race and Ethnicity

• Pedagogy Section Call for Submissions for Teaching about Race and Racism Outside the Classroom Special Issue - Abstracts due May 1, 2024

Pedagogy Section Call  for Submissions for 10 Year Reflection and the Future Special Issue  - Abstracts due July 15, 2024

American Behavioral Scientist

• A Sampling of Pre-Internet Networked Operations  – deadline November 1, 2024

World Futures Review

• Environmental Futures – advancing images of mutual human-nature relationships  – deadline feb 29, 2024: Abstract submission (300-500 words)

Chinese Journal of Sociology

• Toward a Hopeful Sociology of Digital China  – Deadline May 31, 2024
• China and the Environment   – Deadline August 31, 2024

Jump to navigation

"Food and Memory" - 3rd International Interdisciplinary Conference

Conference online: 27-28 June 2024

ABOUT CONFERENCE: 

​Researchers have long confirmed the importance of studying food-related issues in the past and in the present-day world. During our interdisciplinary conference, we are going to concentrate on the relationships between food and memory. In what sense – and in what circumstances – can food be regarded as an identity-building factor? What role does it play in shaping our individual and collective memories? How can food studies deepen our knowledge on the social and cultural aspects of our lives? Why are food memories so often related to important experiences of individuals and societies?

Marie Corelli centenary publication

Following the success of the commemorative conference of 4 May, we are delighted to announce a Call for Papers for a publication dedicated to the work and cultural influence of Marie Corelli.  The centenary of 2024 offers those working on Corelli and in related research areas the opportunity to consider her anew. We welcome abstracts of 300 words accompanied by a short biography to be submitted to  [email protected]  by 8 June.

Journal of Law and Health Call for Papers 2024-25 Symposium

Trending conversations.

• CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS: Ohio Northern University Law Review Fall 2024 and Spring 2025, 51st Volume
• Call for Papers and Abstracts - FAMU Heirs' Property Symposium
• Call for Submissions: Santa Clara University HTLJ Vol. 41
• Call for Submissions: Michigan Journal of Race & Law, Vol. 30
• Call for Book Review Submissions - Dickinson Law Review Volume 129

Financial Pitfalls and Promises: Addressing Modern Challenges in Healthcare Finance

Health law and finance are two vital pillars of modern healthcare systems, each playing a critical role in shaping the delivery, accessibility, and affordability of healthcare services. The intersection of these two fields presents a rich landscape for exploration, offering insights into the intricate dynamics that govern the healthcare industry. In recognition of this, we invite scholars, researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to contribute to a comprehensive discussion through our upcoming conference on healthcare finance.

This interdisciplinary conference aims to foster dialogue and collaboration among professionals from law, finance, healthcare administration, public health, economics, and related fields. We welcome submissions that delve into various aspects of healthcare finance, including but not limited to: healthcare innovation policy, healthcare financing models, health insurance regulation, healthcare payment systems, medical liability and malpractice, healthcare antitrust and competition law, health information privacy and security, and healthcare fraud and abuse.

We invite submissions of original research papers, policy analyses, case studies, theoretical frameworks, empirical studies, and interdisciplinary perspectives. Submissions may range from theoretical inquiries to applied research with practical implications for policymakers, healthcare practitioners, industry stakeholders, and the public.

Important Dates:

Abstract Submission Deadline: August 15, 2024 Notification of Acceptance: September 15, 2024 Draft Submission Deadline (Tentative): November 1, 2024 Conference Date (Tentative): November 8, 2024

Submission Guidelines:

Abstracts should be no more than 300 words and include key objectives, methodology, and expected contributions. Full papers should be between 5,000 and 8,000 words, including references, and formatted according to The Bluebook (21st Ed.). (Authors who do not publish primarily in law journals may use alternative reference formatting that our editors will convert to Bluebook upon submission.)

Please submit your abstracts and inquiries to [email protected]. For more information and updates, visit https://www.law.csuohio.edu/newsevents/journal-law-health-symposium.

Join us in advancing knowledge, promoting dialogue, and driving innovation at the nexus of health law and finance. Your contributions are crucial in shaping the future of healthcare for generations to come.

Sincerely, Gilbert Jones, MA, MLIS Senior Editor,  Journal of Law and Health Cleveland State University College of Law Cleveland, OH 44115

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Why Is N.Y.U. Forcing Protesters to Write Apology Letters?

The university calls it a “restorative practice”; the students call it a coerced confession.

By Ginia Bellafante

Ginia Bellafante writes the Big City column, a weekly commentary on the politics, culture and life of New York City.

At one point during the demonstrations at Columbia University in 1968, protesters took the acting dean of the liberal arts college hostage. Barricading his office door with furniture, they kept Henry Simmons Coleman, a former Navy man, locked up for 26 hours. When he was finally released, he seemed unfazed; there had been plenty to eat. Retaliation was not on his agenda. So little did it interest him, apparently, that he went on to write letters of recommendation on behalf of those captors who applied to law school.

Although elite-college officials have been spared kidnapping amid the current turmoil resulting from the war in Gaza, it is hard to imagine any administrator acting quite so forgivingly now. In the decades since the previous round of unrest, the modern university has become paradoxically more coddling and less conciliatory — caught between its subservience to the student consumer demanding an almost therapeutic comfort and a donor base insistent in its perceived authority, bending to no one.

Inevitably, questions around consequences for the student protests have become entangled in these contradictions. A few days after she and dozens of other students and faculty members were arrested at a demonstration at New York University on April 22, Ellis Garey, who had just completed a doctorate in history, got an email from the Office of the Dean of Students that she found perplexing.

“Living and processing this distressing experience evokes various emotions and complex feelings which may affect your ability to focus and feel safe,” it read. But the only “distressing experience,” to her mind, was N.Y.U.’s decision to call in the police to quiet the protests in the first place. The office went on to promise “guidance, encouragement and support” for the problem it had created.

While the university eventually moved to have the criminal charges against the students dropped, it initiated a disciplinary process against some of them (the university will not disclose how many) that seemed as if it had been conjured in the writers’ room of a dystopian sci-fi series . In order to return to the university, some students would be required to complete a 49-page set of readings and tasks — “modules” — known as the Ethos Integrity Series, geared at helping participants “make gains” in “moral reasoning” and “ethical decision making.” In a letter to the administration, Liam Murphy, a professor at the law school, called it “an intellectual embarrassment,” betraying the university’s mission as a training ground for independent thought and forcing students merely “to consume pages and pages of pablum.”

The Ethos Integrity Series was not the only command. Some students would be assigned a “reflection paper,” the details of which were laid out by the Office of Student Conduct. In it they would address several questions, among them: What are your values? Did the decision you made align with your personal values? What have you done or need still to do to make things right? Explicitly instructed not to “justify” their actions, the students were told to turn their papers in by May 29 in “12-point Times New Roman or similar font.”

In an email, John Beckman, a spokesman for N.Y.U., defended the protocols, explaining that these papers have been a common sanction at the university for at least eight years, part of an approach to discipline that relies on “restorative practices.” In this instance, though, the exercise cannibalizes the mission, favoring a will to dishonesty — inviting a charade of guilt. Anyone driven to protest is marching and chanting precisely as an expression of a certain set of fiercely held moral beliefs and values — not in deviation from them. Someone leaving her dorm room with a sign that says “Free Palestine” probably believes she is already doing what she needs to do “to make things right.”

As Ms. Garey put it, “I’m not going to apologize for opposing genocide.” The risk to her — someone who has finished her Ph.D. work — is the threat of a mark on her transcript, she said, for a failure to comply.

She and her cohort have had the support of various members of the faculty, who have condemned the approach as punitive and infantilizing, a capitulation to a corporate management style steeped in the art of reprisal and delivered in the name of personal growth. In a faculty listserv, this week, Robert Cohen , a professor of history and social studies at N.Y.U. whose scholarship focuses on 20th-century protest movements, said that he could think of no instance from the campus demonstrations in the ’60s in which a university had so “coerced” students to declare that their dissent was “wrong.”

Over the past two decades, N.Y.U. has seen its status and fortunes rise as a global brand. This, in the view of Paula Chakravartty, a professor of media and communications at N.Y.U., and many of her colleagues is exactly where the problem lies — because it cannot be both “the Starbucks of education” and “a serious university.”

An earlier version of this article misstated the surname of an N.Y.U. doctoral student. She is Ellis Garey, not Geary.

How we handle corrections

Ginia Bellafante has served as a reporter, critic and, since 2011, as the Big City columnist . She began her career at The Times as a fashion critic, and has also been a television critic. She previously worked at Time magazine. More about Ginia Bellafante

The Campus Protests Over the Gaza War

News and Analysis

​​City University of New York School of Law is known for its activism, and, lately, for pro-Palestinian commencement addresses. This year, the student speech was canceled .

The Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Dartmouth College voted to censure the university’s president  over her decision to summon the police  to remove a pro-Palestinian encampment.

Handala, a cartoon character created over 50 years ago that represents the resilience of Palestinians, has become an inspiration for protesters .

Scenes From the Protests:  As tensions escalated over pro-Palestinian student encampments at campuses nationwide, this is what our photographers saw .

Map of Arrests:  Since a crackdown on demonstrators at Columbia University on April 18, more than 2,900 people have been arrested or detained on campuses across the country .

Agreements With Protesters:  Several schools struck deals with demonstrators to end disruptive encampments. Here are some highlights of the agreements .