2009 SIOP Program Acceptance Statistics
John C. Scott
SIOP Conference Program Chair
This year the SIOP Program Committee received well over 1,200 submissions that spanned a variety of formats and topic areas. Each submission was evaluated by at least three reviewers who were assigned by matching their area(s) of expertise with the submission’s content (and taking into account an appropriate academic/practitioner balance). Drawing upon a pool of 1,171 reviewers, the review process resulted in an overall acceptance rate of 72.1%. When posters are removed from the equation, the overall acceptance rate was 65.2%. Table 1 presents the acceptance rates by format and overall.
Table 1
________________________________________________________________________
Format Total submissions Accepted Percent accepted
_______________________________________________________________
|
Poster
|
879
|
659
|
74.9
|
|
Symposium
|
245
|
150
|
61.2
|
|
Panel
|
86
|
66
|
76.7
|
|
Roundtable/ Conversation Hour
|
27
|
17
|
62.9
|
|
Master Tutorial
|
6
|
4
|
66.7
|
|
Debate
|
1
|
1
|
100
|
|
Total
|
1244
|
897
|
72.1
|
|
Total without Poster
|
365
|
238
|
65.2
|
________________________________________________________________________
Another interesting statistic was the relative mix of sessions in terms of their relevance for practitioners, academics, or both. During the submission process, each submitter was asked to identify who they thought was the most likely audience for their proposed session. Table 2 shows this breakdown for accepted submissions.
Table 2
________________________________________________________________________
% Relevance - % Relevance -
Intended audience excluding posters including posters
_______________________________________________________________
|
|
|
Mixed (Academics and Practitioners)
|
55
|
52
|
|
Practitioners
|
28
|
13
|
|
Academics
|
17
|
35
|
________________________________________________________________________
The majority of accepted sessions are intended for a mixed audience regardless of whether posters are considered in the equation or not. When posters are excluded, 83% of the sessions are relevant for practitioners (55% mixed + 28% practitioners) vesus 72% of the sessions that are relevant for academics. When posters are included in the mix, 67% of the sessions are considered relevant for practitioners versus 87% for academics.
These numbers do not include the special events, theme tracks, invited speakers, communities of interest, or interactive posters. These results show that the 2009 conference offered something for everyone regardless of affiliation or interest!