As a big fan of IF, I find this really depressing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

I've been to 30 or so national or international conferences in biology, and have never had an abstract rejected. I don't think I'm doing anything special, so I assume pretty much everyone gets in. More presenters = more money. I've also been on the selection committee side and it is definitely not more selective than peer review. We're only reviewing an abstract, usually under 100 words. Prob varies by field though. Maybe medical conferences are selective?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    You can't generalise about conferences any more than you can generalise about individual journals, or publishers, or peer review.

    Lack of peer review is not a standalone criticism. The problems with this study are obvious and you do not need to rely on an imaginary peer reviewer to point them out.

  • source
  • parent