Review Guide DESRIST 2024
DESRIST reviews are a critical and essential input for acceptance/rejection decisions. The track and program chairs value each reviewer’s input as a significant resource that impacts the quality of the conference. Reviews also substantially influence the work of others and can have a positive impact on publications.
DESRIST follows a double-blind review process. Authors must anonymize their submissions. If you have a conflict regarding the double-blind process please communicate with the track chairs immediately, or if in doubt, the program chairs. All review participants should keep submissions, reviewers, and the review process are confidential.
Please keep the following in mind as you review a paper:
- What is the contribution of the paper? Are the ideas novel? Is the contribution substantial enough to recommend acceptance?
- Is the paper methodologically and theoretically (if applicable) strong?
- Will the paper generate interesting discussion?
- Does the paper have potential to be developed further? (e.g., into additional work, journal submission, etc.)
- Does the paper fit DESRIST and/or the submitted track? As you know, DESRIST is different from most other conferences, given our focus on design and the development of systems.
The above criteria are relaxed for research-in-progress papers where the focus is on potential contribution.
As a guideline, a good review is typically about a page long and includes the following:
- (if relevant) A sentence or two about your expertise especially if you are knowledgeable about some aspects of the paper and less knowledgeable about others
- A short two to three sentence summaries of what you think are the highlights of the paper
- A list of concerns that are typically listed in order of importance
- Suggestions for improvement
- The main reason you chose to accept or reject the paper
- Reference (if applicable)
Sources
- https://icis2023.aisconferences.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/ICIS-2023-Reviewer-Guide.pdf
- https://misq.umn.edu/skin/frontend/default/misq/pdf/EditorialInfo/ReviewerResources.pdf