Abstract evaluation criteria
For reference
These are the criteria which the reviewers will use for evaluating abstracts.
Evaluation criteria
1. Quality of language
- Clearly communicate ideas and concepts
- Use concise and precise language
- Demonstrate a professional tone and style
- Free from grammatical and technical errors
2. Aim
- The aim is clearly and simply stated
- Where relevant, research questions are concrete
3. Background and context
- Establish the importance of the research
- Clearly describe the rationale and need for the study
4. Methodology
- Clearly describe what was done
- Where relevant, use appropriate instruments or procedures
5. Results
- Directly address the aim
- Include relevant findings
- Descriptive or inferential statistics, where appropriate
- Avoid interpretation or specualation in the results section
6. Conclusions
- Address the original research question
- Are supported by the presented results
- Do not simply repeat the results
- Do not introduce new findings not included in the results section
7. Relevance to the conference theme
- Indicate how the research addresses societal needs, real-world contexts, or contributes to theoretical developments
- Indicate implications for practice, policy, or societal impact in the short- or long-term
- Where relevant, demonstrate relevance across disciplines or potential for interdisciplinary dialogue