On Tuesday, the Convention Committee released the announcements of acceptances for the 2017 convention in San Antonio. We have a fantastic lineup that includes over 100 symposia and workshops! Thanks to everyone who took the time and effort to submit an application. The field is stronger for your efforts.

As with previous years, the application process was highly competitive and we were not able to accept the majority of paper submissions. Feelings of disappointment are natural and people have had a number of questions about the application process. I want to use this as an opportunity to share some additional insights about the admissions process and changes that were implemented this year.

People who submitted in previous years are well aware that the review process is very rigorous and includes a double-blind, peer-review process of a panel of expert volunteers. In addition to scientific merit, a committee sought to include a diversity of research perspectives to ensure the program was well balanced. On behalf of SPSP, I want to thank the review committee for undertaking this enormous task!

The Convention Committee also undertook several exciting programming changes this year to enrich the conference. Here a few of the highlights:

1. For the first time, we accepted submissions for single-paper sessions. This new feature was designed to allow those less-connected (junior faculty, international attendees, etc) the chance to have their paper grouped into a symposium. For those that submitted into this category, if they were not accepted, they were eligible for a data blitz or poster (depending on the preferences selected by the applicant at time of submission).

2. Limits were placed on the number of submissions per person for symposia. At the same time, we opened the door for submitters to submit for both symposia and single-presenter sessions (single paper, poster, data blitz). This resulted in a decrease in the number of submissions for symposia, without jeopardizing the quality. The acceptance rate jumped from 34% last year to above 50% this year—the highest it’s been in many years. In addition, because of schedule changes, we were able to accept more symposia, making for a richer program.

3. Submission opportunities were expanded to include professional development and deep dive workshops. We are pleased that seven deep dive workshops will be included in the program this year, providing attendees the opportunity to learn cutting-edge analytic techniques from world experts at the conference.

4. Additional schedule changes include shortening of the schedule for Thursday and adding more subject-specific poster sessions with fewer posters in each session. This was designed to create more thematic and coherent poster sessions.

Like with any change, we will continually revise the process to make it better at future conferences. We will be listening to your feedback and will review all available data as we move forward.

Additionally, some have expressed concern that only 12 single submission talks were grouped into symposia and 36 were grouped into data blitz. At first glance, this seems very low considering that 2079 abstracts were reviewed in this process. But this number has proven confusing to some people, so I want to help clarify how it was derived. Of the 2079 submissions in the single-presenter category: 

• 1098 opted to be considered for posters ONLY

• 675 were open to all formats of presenting their abstract

• 77 wanted data blitz or single paper ONLY

• 212 wanted to be considered for single papers ONLY

• 17 wanted to be considered for data blitz ONLY

• 92 were withdrawn because the submitter was accepted into a symposia

• 306 did NOT want to be considered for a poster

This means that several hundred applied for a paper session and we were only able to offer speaking slots to roughly 50 of these applicants. It is important to note that many of those not accepted were individuals who would have normally JUST submitted a poster and were now permitted to be considered for single-paper sessions with no additional effort on their part. 

Seeing the high volume of interest in single-paper sessions, we will certainly consider changes for next year. These sessions often are more time-consuming to organize for the program committee, but we are open to the possibility of adding more slots to the program for single-paper sessions if we receive very positive feedback of these sessions during the convention. Since this is our first year offering this option, we plan to use a data driven approach before we widely implement it. Your feedback will be crucial for helping us evaluate this option.

We are grateful for your understanding and feedback in helping us navigate these changes. Since the first SPSP convention in Nashville, this convention has grown and adapted based on the needs of SPSP members and the field, and we will continue to grow and innovate moving forward.

Sincerely,

Tessa West

Chair, 2017 SPSP Convention