Reject me: Peer review and SIGCHI

Michael Bernstein, Dan Cosley, Carl DiSalvo, Sanjay Kairam, David Karger, Travis Kriplean, Cliff Lampe, Wendy Mackay, Loren Terveen, Jacob Wobbrock, Sarita Yardi

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

1 Scopus citations


The HCI research community grows bigger each year, refining and expanding its boundaries in new ways. The ability to effectively review submissions is critical to the growth of CHI and related conferences. The review process is designed to produce a consistent supply of fair, high-quality reviews without overloading individual reviewers; yet, after each cycle, concerns are raised about limitations of the process. Every year, participants are left wondering why their papers were not accepted (or why they were). This SIG will explore reviewing through a critical and constructive lens, discussing current successes and future opportunities in the CHI review process. Goals will include actionable conclusions about ways to improve the system, potential alternative peer models, and the creation of materials to educate newcomer reviewers.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationExtended Abstracts - The 30th ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2012
Number of pages4
StatePublished - 2012
Event30th ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2012 - Austin, TX, United States
Duration: May 5 2012May 10 2012

Publication series

NameConference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings


Other30th ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2012
CountryUnited States
CityAustin, TX


  • design
  • methods
  • reflexivity
  • reviewing
  • systems

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Reject me: Peer review and SIGCHI'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this