***** To join INSNA, visit http://www.insna.org *****
where computer science meets social networks ---
S.D. Clark Professor of Sociology, FRSC NetLab Director
Department of Sociology 725 Spadina Avenue, Room 388
University of Toronto Toronto Canada M5S 2J4 twitter:barrywellman
Updating history: http://chass.utoronto.ca/oldnew/cybertimes.php
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012, Reid Priedhorsky wrote:
> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 17:12:48 -0600
> From: Reid Priedhorsky <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: CSCW 2013 Publicity <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: CSCW 2013 Call for Papers
> Hi Barry,
> I'm publicity chair for CSCW 2013, the ACM conference on Computer-Supported
> Cooperative Work. Your name is on a list of people who have helped to spread
> the word in previous years -- specifically, to the CITASA and SOCNET
> communities. If you could pass on this CFP, that would be awesome.
> Thanks, and please let me know what questions you have!
> Reid Priedhorsky
> CALL FOR PAPERS, COMPUTER-SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK 2013 (CSCW 2013)
> San Antonio, TX, Feb 23-27
> CSCW is an international and interdisciplinary conference focused on how
> technology intersects with social practices. To support diverse and
> high-quality contributions, CSCW employs a two-phase review process described
> below. CSCW does not impose an arbitrary length limit on submissions; please
> refer to the call below for details about aligning paper contribution and
> IMPORTANT DATES
> * May 25, 2012: Title and Abstract requested (to improve reviewer match)
> * June 1, 11:59 Pacific Daylight Time: Submissions due
> * July 27: First-round notification (Revise & Resubmit or Reject)
> * August 27, 11:59 Pacific Daylight Time: Revised papers due
> * October 19: Final notifications
> * November 26, 11:59 Pacific Daylight Time: "Camera-ready" due
> Title, abstract and paper submissions must be made via the Precision
> Conference System. A link to the submission site will be made available by
> early May.
> We invite submissions that detail existing practices or inform the design or
> deployment of systems. The scope of CSCW includes, but is not limited to,
> social computing, technologically-enabled or enhanced communication,
> collaboration, information sharing, and coordination. It includes
> socio-technical activities at work, in the home, in education, in healthcare,
> in the arts, for socializing and for entertainment. New results or new ways
> of thinking about, studying or supporting shared activities can be in these
> and related areas:
> - Social Computing. Studies, theories, designs, mechanisms, and software
> infrastructures addressing social networking, user-generated content, online
> gaming, crowdsourcing and collective intelligence, virtual worlds,
> collaborative information seeking, etc.
> - Theories and models. Critical analysis or organizing theory with clear
> relevance to the design or study of social and collaborative systems.
> - System design. Hardware, architectures, infrastructures, interaction
> design, technical foundations, or toolkits that enable the building of new
> social and collaborative systems.
> - Empirical investigations. Findings, guidelines, ethnographic studies of
> technologies, practices or use of communication, collaboration and social
> communication technologies.
> - Methodologies and tools. Novel methods or combinations of approaches and
> tools used in building systems or studying their use.
> - Domain-specific social and collaborative applications. For healthcare,
> transportation, gaming (for enjoyment or work), ICT4D, sustainability,
> collective intelligence or global collaboration, or other domains.
> - Collaboration systems based on emerging technologies. Mobile and ubiquitous
> computing, game engines, virtual worlds, and sensor-based environments.
> - Crossing boundaries. Studies, prototypes, or other investigations that
> explore interactions across disciplines, distance, languages, generations,
> and cultures, to help better understand how to transcend social, temporal,
> and spatial boundaries.
> Papers should detail original research contributions. Papers must report new
> research results that represent a contribution to the field. They must
> provide sufficient details and support for their results and conclusions.
> They must cite relevant published research or experience, highlight novel
> aspects of the submission, and identify the most significant contributions.
> Evaluation is on the basis of originality, significance, quality of research,
> quality of writing, and contribution to conference program diversity.
> PAPER LENGTH (new for CSCW 2013)
> There is no arbitrary minimum or maximum length imposed on papers. Rather,
> reviewers will be instructed to weigh the contribution of a paper relative to
> its length. Papers should report research thoroughly but succinctly: brevity
> is a virtue. Many research papers will be 10 pages long (the previous length
> limit for papers) but may be shorter if the contribution can be described and
> supported in fewer pages. While we will review papers longer than 10 pages,
> the contribution must warrant the extra length: the more you write, the more
> work for reviewers! Shorter, more focused papers (called Notes in years prior
> to 2013) are encouraged and will be reviewed like any other paper. Papers
> whose length is incommensurate with their contribution will be rejected.
> Papers will be presented at the CSCW conference and will be included in the
> conference proceedings archived in the ACM Digital Library. CSCW does not
> accept submissions that were published previously in formally reviewed
> publications or that are currently submitted elsewhere.
> Submissions must be in the HCI Archive Format.
> Send queries about Paper submissions to [log in to unmask]
> Papers are subject to blind reviewing. Your submission should have authors'
> names and affiliations removed and avoid obvious identifying features.
> Citations to your own relevant work should not be anonymous, but please cite
> it without identifying yourself as the author. For example, say "Prior work
> by [author]" instead of "In my prior work."
> Papers must include an abstract of no more than 150 words. Titles and
> Abstracts that are uploaded to PCS early will be used to find the best
> possible reviewer matches. Consider submitting a video that illustrates your
> work, either as a video figure judged as part of the submission (no more than
> two minutes long and 30MB in size) or as a longer stand-alone submission to
> the video track (Call for Videos). Videos are not required for submission of
> CSCW 2013 Papers submissions must be uploaded online at the PCS submission
> system by 11:59 Pacific Daylight Time on June 1, 2012 to be considered.
> Confidentiality of submitted material will be maintained. Upon acceptance,
> the titles, authorship, and abstracts of Papers will be used in the Advance
> Program. Submissions should contain no information or material that will be
> proprietary or confidential at the time of publication, and should cite no
> publication that will be proprietary or confidential at that time.
> Final versions of accepted Papers must be formatted according to the detailed
> instructions. Copyright release forms must be signed for inclusion in the
> proceedings and ACM Digital Library.
> CSCW 2013 will continue the "Best of CSCW" awards program, in accordance with
> SIGCHI guidelines. Upon acceptance, some Papers will be nominated for
> additional review to identify "Honorable Mention" and "Best" awards.
> Approximately 5% of submissions may be nominated and 1% of total submissions
> awarded Best Paper.
> REVIEW PROCESS (new as of CSCW 2012)
> Papers will undergo two review cycles. After the first review a submission
> will receive either a "Revise&Resubmit" or "Reject" notification. Authors of
> papers that are not rejected have about 4 weeks to revise and resubmit them.
> The revision will be reviewed as the basis for the final decision. This is
> like a journal process, except that it is limited to one revision with a
> strict deadline.
> The primary contact author will be sent the first round reviews.
> Revise&Resubmits will require significant attention to prepare the
> resubmission for the second review. Authors of Revise&Resubmits will be asked
> to provide a description of how reviewer comments were addressed. Submissions
> that are rejected in the first round cannot be revised for CSCW 2013, but
> authors can begin reworking them for submission elsewhere. Authors need to
> allocate time for revisions after July 27, when the first round reviews are
> returned. Final acceptance decisions will be based on the second (revised)
> The revision cycle enables authors to spend a month to fix the English,
> integrate missing papers in the literature, redo an analysis, adopt
> terminology familiar to this field, and perhaps even gather more data,
> problems that in the past could lead to rejection. It also provides the
> authors of papers that would have been accepted anyway the opportunity to
> make their submissions even stronger contributions to the CSCW research
> literature. The revision is submitted with a letter where the authors explain
> how the paper was revised, allowing more interaction between authors and
> This review process is not an effort to change the ?quality bar? for CSCW,
> either to raise or lower it! Instead, the intent is to give more authors a
> chance to clear the bar. This process may lead to more diverse kinds of
> papers qualifying. Reviewers have more time to consider the significance as
> well as the technical quality of submissions. Authors from related
> disciplines have an opportunity to adjust to the literature and terminology
> found in CSCW.
> This is not an invitation to submit extended abstracts or incomplete papers.
> As in the past, submit the paper that you would like to have published.
> Incomplete submissions will not be reviewed. Nearly half of submissions may
> be rejected on the first round, enabling the reviewers to focus on papers
> that have a good chance for acceptance. The strongest first round submissions
> will receive reviews that make it clear to the authors that few or no
> revisions are required for acceptance Acceptance is not guaranteed for papers
> making the second round; however, the CSCW 2012 experience showed that the
> majority of papers that made it to the second round were accepted. As a
> specific data point, nearly all submissions that received an average review
> score of 4 (out of 5) or higher were accepted.
> Additional author benefits: The rebuttal, which was focused on pointing out
> reviewing flaws, is replaced by a revision, which can be more appealing to
> read and actually improve your work. Authors of papers not making it through
> the first round benefit from a very quick turnaround.
> The CSCW 2012 program was the largest in the history of the conference, and
> reactions from the community were largely very positive. To get a sense of
> the range of topics covered, you can view the CSCW 2012 program which
> comprised 164 papers, 65 interactive posters, 14 workshops, as well as demos,
> videos, and other events http://cscw2012.org/. CSCW 2013 expects to build on
> this success.
SOCNET is a service of INSNA, the professional association for social
network researchers (http://www.insna.org). To unsubscribe, send
an email message to [log in to unmask] containing the line
UNSUBSCRIBE SOCNET in the body of the message.