Review procedures

An important feature of CIM is the development and application of appropriate procedures to ensure and enhance the scholarly quality of conference contributions.

Instructions to abstract reviewers

Before reviewing the abstracts to which you have been assigned, please first read the instructions to authors, as well as the following instructions.

Please write your reviews in English and send them by email (either as email text or attachment).

Your reviews should be organized as follows:

1. Academic quality: the normal criterion for evaluating research abstracts and articles
(a) rating (1=poor, 2=ok, 3=good, 4=excellent)
(b) reasons for the rating
(c) suggestions for improving the abstract

2. Interdisciplinarity, i.e. suitability for CIM (rather than another conference series)
(a) rating (1=poor, 2=ok, 3=good, 4=excellent)
(b) reasons for the rating
(c) suggestions for improving the abstract

3. Relevance for MUSICAL STRUCTURE, the conference theme
(a) rating (1=poor, 2=ok, 3=good, 4=excellent)
(b) reasons for the rating
(c) suggestions for improving the abstract

If you are in a hurry, you need only to read the above information. But we hope and recommend that you also read the following paragraphs, and contact us if anything is unclear.

The following comments apply to all three of the above points:

(a) Regarding the ratings, please in every case

(b) Regarding the reasons for your rating, please

(c) Regarding your suggestions for improving the abstract:

The following comments elaborate on each of the three points in turn:

1. Regarding academic quality, please as far as possible

2. Regarding interdisciplinarity, please consider the extent to which the abstract realises the aims of CIM:

Regarding interdisciplinarity, it may be interesting to ask yourself what two main disciplines are addressed by the paper. If your assessment differs from that of the authors, do not hesitate to recommend that they change the abstract accordingly. You may also suggest how the paper could be revised to make is more interdisciplinary, e.g. by introducing a new discipline or by enhancing the role of the second-most-important discipline.

3. Regarding relevance for the conference theme (musical structure),


Further procedural information

Selection of reviewers

Assignment of abstracts to talks, posters, rejects

Selection process for keynotes

Submissions by committee members

Peer review of conference presentations

Toward the end of the conference, each active participant will be asked to rate the presentation and content of the best (non-invited) papers and posters that they witnessed, using a specially prepared form. The results will help us to select authors for awards and invitations for post-conference publication.

Abstract Accommodation Aims Childcare Collaboration Committees Contact Dates Definitions Disciplines Discussion Equipment Evaluation Food History Language Location Photos Presentation Proceedings Program Publications Registration Review Sponors Support Theme Tourism Weather Welcome