GUIDELINES FOR ABSTRACTS
The deadline for abstract submission was March 29th, 2017 (ADT). We will not accept submissions beyond the deadline.
The word limit for the abstract summary is 300 words. Your abstract will appear in the abstract book exactly as you enter it online. You are welcome to submit a tweet of 140 characters to accompany your abstract.
An individual may be primary author on only one abstract and primary authors should submit their own abstracts.
You will need to identify a theme for the abstract submission. Each theme is accompanied by a brief description to help you decide which is most relevant for your submission. There are 18 themes to choose from.
There are four presentation formats to choose from:
Oral presentations are each allotted 15 minutes: 12 minutes for your presentation, two minutes for questions and one minute for transition.
A speed talk is a four-minute presentation during which you may present key-ideas, results and their meaning/implication. As a guide, three slides should be sufficient to allow you to get your point across.
Posters are an extended abstract with easily readable text and graphics. Posters typically include a title, authors, background, methods, 1-3 results, conclusions and acknowledgements.
Instructions on specifications will be available soon.
Video presentations are four minutes and created using various media such as high-resolution video, animation and narration. Authors should use these media in a creative manner to clearly express the purpose of the study, results and their implication and to be understood not only by scientific peers but also by a wider audience. Questions will be asked during a 15-minute period at the end of the session.
Each submitted abstract is reviewed and scored by three independent reviewers who have expertise in the specific subject area. The abstract review process is conducted blind; all authors' names will be removed from the abstract before the reviewer gains access to the abstract. After adjusting for differences in scoring among individual reviewers, abstracts are ranked on the basis of their overall score, and available slots for spoken, poster and video presentations are allocated according to merit using all submissions combined across all themes, taking into account presentation preferences.
Reviewers use the following four criteria to judge abstract submissions:
Abstracts containing significant new findings or presenting new approaches will be given higher scores than those that describe updates, modifications to older findings, or routine applications of well-established research methods.
Abstracts should demonstrate that robust and appropriate research methods were used, and include a scientifically robust study design. The outcome of the research should provide clear answers to the main research questions posed. The methods and results should be described in sufficient detail and the conclusions supported by the data.
This criterion addresses the importance of the research in terms of advancing the field of marine mammal science, or the conservation and management of marine mammals.
Abstracts that are clearly written and concise will receive higher scores. This criterion addresses how well the specific research question(s) and objectives, methods used, primary results, etc are explained, rather than the quality of the study itself. A clearly written abstract follows a logical order (e.g. aims, methods, results, followed by a clear interpretation of the results and any conservation management implications).