Have you ever wondered what happens to your submitted scholarly session proposal after the general call for papers submission deadline; how the final Annual Meeting Program is determined; or how the peer review process is conducted? Keep reading to find out!
Interactive Table of Contents
- Who is responsible for conducting the peer review?
- Do all session types undergo peer review?
- Demystifying the Annual Meeting Peer Review Process
Who is responsible for conducting the peer review?
Representatives from each section, known as the Section Program Chairs, conduct the peer review of proposal submissions directed to their respective section. The American Anthropological Association thanks the 2021 Program Chairs who will enhance the AAA Annual Meeting through the volunteering of their time.
Do all session types undergo peer review?
Below are the submission/session types that undergo section peer review:
- oral presentation sessions (standard and retrospective),
- roundtables (standard and retrospective),
- individually volunteered papers,
- group gallery submissions,
- individual gallery submissions, and
- group flash presentations.
Demystifying the Annual Meeting Peer Review Process
The review process consists of three (3) review “rounds,” all of which are detailed below.
Review round 1: RELEVANCE
- During this round, section program chairs skim proposals (directed to his/her section) and determine relevance to the section with a yes/no decision.
Review round 2A: Assign INVITED or COSPONSORED status
- During this round (which runs simultaneously with 2B), section program chairs work within their sections and with other section program chairs to decide which fully-submitted panels should receive invited or cosponsored designations.
- Sessions granted Invited and Cosponsored designations do not undergo further review, and are guaranteed primary placement on the final program.
Review round 2B: BUILD SESSIONS from Individually Volunteered Paper submissions
- During this review round (which runs simultaneously with 2A), section program chairs review individually-volunteered paper submissions directed to his/her section and form them into panels of four (4) to seven (7) paper presenters.
- These “newly-created sessions” will be reviewed and evaluated in the next and final review round.
- Section program chairs also have the ability to request that AAA extend individual gallery (poster) invitations to individually volunteered paper submissions.
Review round 3: REVIEW and EVALUATE Submitted and Newly-Created Sessions
- During this review round, section program chairs use review criteria to evaluate submissions that are not granted Invited or Cosponsored status, as well as the sessions the primary chairs have created from the individually volunteered paper submissions.
- Using a scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high), each reviewer will evaluate each submission based upon four (4) weighted criteria:
- Rate the rigor of scholarship in this submission (25%)
- Rate the relevance of this submission to critical issues within the discipline (25%)
- Rate the importance of this submission to current issues of broad concern (15%)
- Rate the quality of the submission overall (35%)
After all three of the review rounds have been completed, the decisions from all three rounds are compiled by the AAA Meetings Department in preparation for the scheduling phase.
AAA staff do not review or evaluate section submissions, or participate in the section’s peer review process.
Once the review period concludes, the top 50% of scores from within each section are given an A-grade; the next 30% of top-scoring proposals are given a B-grade; and the bottom 20 percent are given a C-grade.
In June, the Executive Program Committee Chair and Chair Elect will visit the AAA office to populate the Annual Meeting program in the following order, until the program is full –
- 1st priority: Sessions awarded Executive Session designation by the Executive Program Committee
- 2nd priority: Sessions granted Invited and Cosponsored designations by Section Program Chairs
- 3rd priority: A scores from each section (highest aggregate reviewer scores to lowest)
- 4th priority: B scores from each section (highest aggregate reviewer scores to lowest)
- 5th priority: C scores from each section (highest aggregate reviewer scores to lowest)
Accept/decline notifications are sent to all submitters in mid July, and a preliminary Annual Meeting program will be released in mid-August.
Not sure why your 2021 AAA Annual Meeting session is scheduled for a particular date or time?
- An executive program co-chair shares their experience.
- Read about the Annual Meeting scheduling experience.
AAA does not collect or release reviewer comments. AAA encourages interested individuals to contact the Section Program Chairs directly with questions regarding the reviewing of their submission(s).