Submission guidelines and policies
Find the ASAC submission guidelines and policies here. As a divisional officer, it is a good idea to become familiar with these as we rely on you to uphold the guidelines for submissions, as well as the policies which help to provide a high-quality conference experience and avoid any issues or discrepancies with unique or questionable circumstances.
Academic integrity considerations for divisional officers
- If divisional officers wish to make a submission to their own division, they should notify the Division Chair of their intention and make their submissions through the conference submissions website. It is important that divisional officers have no role whatsoever in the reviewing of their own submission and/or the final accept/reject decision. For these reasons, the Division Chair should handle the review process for these submissions. Should the Division Chair wish to make a submission, they should notify the rest of the divisional officers. The Divisional Editor should handle the review process for the chair’s submission.
- Divisional Editors must ensure that all submissions do not include any identifiable author information prior to distributing each paper for review. Any author information must be removed prior to distribution in order to protect the integrity of the double-blind review process.
- Divisional Editors are encouraged to review submissions for potential plagiarism or other problems (e.g. paper not in APA style) prior to distributing papers for review. Any suspicion of a violation of academic integrity must immediately be reported to the Division Chair and the VP Program. Divisional Editors and/or the VP Program may reject a paper for plagiarism without the paper undergoing peer review. The conference organizers should be informed of all cases in which a violation of academic integrity has been determined.
- Divisional Editors should attempt to avoid conflicts of interest when assigning papers to reviewers. If a reviewer receives a paper to review that creates a real or perceived conflict of interest for him/her, or if reviewers consider themselves to be unfairly biased (positively or negatively) or somehow not at arm’s length from the author(s) of the paper being reviewed, the reviewer should decline the invitation to review as soon as possible. Please ensure this is clearly communicated to all reviewers.