<p>Are we allowed to submit the same abstract to multiple conferences for review, but then only pick one to go and present?</p>
<p>What are the rules on presenting similar topics on various presentations?</p>
<p>Prof X?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Change the title.
Ok, so not really a rule and you may already know that, but it really looks nicer when you update your CV.</p>
<p>So sending the same abstract to multiple conferences (as long as we only go to one of them) is allowed?</p>
<p>I could not see why not, but maybe it depends on the discipline. I mean, during my masters I attended two conferences, one in October and the other the following May. My posters were very similar with the obvious exception that I had more data to present (on the same story) in May. So I made the title more specific and made a new poster and went.</p>
<p>How far apart are the conferences? Why only go to one?</p>
<p>Let’s put it this way. A colleague nearly lost his bid for tenure for doing the “title revision” thing, and presenting the SAME paper at different conferences. That is not acceptable. However, if you want to present at two different conferences, simply present on two different aspects of your research.</p>
<p>If you are submitting the same proposal and abstract to two different conferences, and then only attend ONE, it is fine. But on your CV, this should appear only as ONE entry, i.e.</p>
<p>“Fantastic Paper on Magnificent Research,” presented at Annual Conference on Intellectual Things, National Academy of Intellectuals, San Dimas, CA, November 2008. Paper also accepted for presentation by Annual Meeting About Brilliant Discoveries, Association of Brilliant Discoverers, Boondocks, SD.</p>
<p>Sorry, I was not trying to insinuate JUST changing the title to try and dupe anyone, when I first wrote I was not thinking in terms of sending in the exact same abstract, more so on presenting developing research more than once as it develops.</p>
<p>As in my example, the first poster was only 4 months after starting my research, so by nature it was much more broad in scope and had only some preliminary data. Seven months later I had much more to tell, but it was still on the same topic. Because of this, I could have kept the titles the same as the broader one still fit my project, even though a more specific one would be more appropriate. All I was saying is at the second conference it would not have been noticed by anyone that my title did not change (99% of the attendees were not at the first conference) but it looks bad on a CV to have the same title twice, 7 months apart when that is ALL they see of the presentation.</p>
<p>Prof X, for future reference is there anything wrong with presenting the same paper at two conferences as long as you do not try to be devious about it?</p>
<p>“Fantastic Paper on Magnificent Research,” presented at Annual Conference on Intellectual Things, National Academy of Intellectuals, San Dimas, CA, November 2008. Paper also presented at Annual Meeting About Brilliant Discoveries, Association of Brilliant Discoverers, Boondocks, SD, January 2009.</p>
<p>In the end, is it not about sharing the brilliant discoveries?</p>
<p>Good to know sending the same abstract to multiple conferences (as long as I only go to one) is a accepted practice. I thought so too, because if aspiring graduate students can only resend the abstract to another conference after one has rejected us, then we’ll probably only be able to make a presentation once in a blue moon!</p>
<p>The reason I asked is because it seems there is a huge discrepency on opinions on this (even amongst established academics and professors). I was made out to be ‘unethical’ (by the chair of the organizing committee and the department, no less) after I decline an invitation to his/her conference. I furthermore honestly (yes, honesty gets you in trouble sometimes) told him/her my reasons for declining is because I submitted a similar abstract to another conference and hence have to choose. I chose the other conference to go to. Starting from this point, he/she started to admonish me for being ‘unethical’ and ‘selfishly motivated’, because I have ‘wasted the reviewers’ time and effort’ by having ‘separate sets of reviewers read the same abstract’…</p>
<p>Initially, I was truly apologetic because I thought I really did something very wrong, but then upon further contemplation, his/her comments seems out of place and unreasonable. He/She make it seems that organising institutions and reviewers are doing presenters a favor and I have ‘deceived’ them by sending similar abstracts to different conferences, but in actual fact, presenters also have to think up of topics, write the paper and sometimes even financially pay for airfare, lodging and food to go to a conference. The success of a conference is a collaborative effort. Organising and reviewing abstract is part of the organising committee’s responsibility, our part is having accepted the invitation, to do a good presentation. I did not accept the invitation because I knew I would be going to another conference…have I done something ‘unethical’?</p>
<p>limnieng,</p>
<p>IMHO, that professor is being a complete jerk. You “wasted reviewer’s time and effort”?? That’s ridiculous. Thousands of academics send abstracts and proposals to conferences each year, and many of them decline after their proposals were accepted - for all sorts of reasons. (Insufficient travel funds, decided instead to spend travel funds on conference in Hawaii, sick kid, sick dog, etc.) You have NOT been unethical. My advice? I have no good advice, except avoid Dr. Jerk as much as possible.</p>
<p>New_User,</p>
<p>Unfortunately, it is not all about sharing brilliant discoveries. It is about presenting in front of peers in order to get critiques in order to improve the project. And usually, there is a space of time between conferences that should be used to incorporate previous critiques, and improve said project, so that said project is different by the time it is proposed to / presented at another conference.</p>
<p>I stand by my initial statement, which boils down to “don’t present the same thing twice.”</p>
<p>Again, just my opinion. As limnieng’s dreadful experience vividly demonstrates, the opinions of others may differ.</p>
<p>I have an undergraduate symposium coming up in April. Is it okay if I put it as “will be presented at xxx symposium in April, 2008” ?</p>
<p>Does it look better to put my work in a form of a publication or work presented rather than just listing the topic on a CV?
Should I still list my unfinished projects on there anyway?</p>
<p>valecollegorian,</p>
<p>The proper form is:
“Fantastic Paper on Magnificent Research,” accepted for presentation at Annual Conference on Intellectual Things, National Academy of Intellectuals, San Dimas, CA, April 2008. </p>
<p>Your second question is a bit more difficult to answer, since you don’t have a choice about putting your work in the form of a publication or presentation. If it was published, then list it as such. If it was presented, then list it as such. </p>
<p>In my field, topics of work in progress (or topics of interest) have no place on a CV. A CV should only include completed work, with one exception: a thesis or dissertation in progress. The form is:</p>
<p>“Groundbreaking Thesis: One Brilliant Undergraduate’s Magnum Opus,” defense scheduled for May 2008. (Or, if it is an undergraduate senior thesis with no actual defense, “anticipated completion, May 2008.”)</p>