Poster resubmission question

[hamsterpants]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Hello,

I submitted a poster abstract to an international conference. My abstract was accepted but I had to withdraw my poster due to unforeseen financial circumstances 🙁

Is it still ok to submit my abstract to a national conference or would this be considered bad form? I still would like to present this poster since I was not able to do so earlier.

Thoughts?

Thanks!

 

[futureapppsy2]

You can definitely resubmit the poster! Actually presenting the same poster twice is where it gets sketchy, but even that can be justified in some (rare) circumstances, if they are two completely different audiences (say, presenting something at a local conference and then at a national conference).

 

[hamsterpants]

You can definitely resubmit the poster! Actually presenting the same poster twice is where it gets sketchy, but even that can be justified in some (rare) circumstances, if they are two completely different audiences (say, presenting something at a local conference and then at a national conference).

Awesome. Thank you so much, future appsy. I hope grad school is treating you well.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Awesome. Thank you so much, future appsy. I hope grad school is treating you well.

Thanks, and same to you! Good to see you around again. 🙂

 

[4410]

There are times when due to unforeseen circumstances such as a medical emergency or having a baby early where people have not been able to present their posters but they had a friend or faculty member set up the poster session and answer questions. This happened to me at a national conference and my faculty adviser who was going to the conference set up the poster for me and answered any questions. Sometimes there are conflicts in scheduling where a poster presentation during the same time that the person is presenting a workshop and they have others set up the poster and answer questions. Here recently I attended a State conference and the student's father was doing her poster session as she was attending a student meeting about internship applications. I guess what I am trying to emphasis as Poster session are fairly lax and some students are able to count this as a poster presentation despite not actually being at the poster presentation. Not sure how ethical this is but there are times when there is a group presentation and one member was not able to attend but they still count it as a presentation since they were part of the group that submitted the presentation but they could not attend the actual presentation and they still count it as a presentation on their CV.

 

[Pragma]

Yes if you withdrew it then you can definitely (and should) still present it at another conference. These things happen sometimes and as long as you formally withdrew it, there should be no issues. You just can't take credit twice for the same presentation.

I have heard about people authoring or co-authoring posters and then not attending the conference. This is probably just fine in the case of mentors who can't be around or people that made a good contribution to a project.

However, I personally have never taken credit on my CV for anything I was not physically present for. It doesn't sit well with me ethically. But, I don't begrudge others for taking credit as co-authors when they aren't there, because I understand that one can't travel to every conference. However, my personal opinion is that if you are the first author on a poster and you aren't there (e.g., having a co-author or student present), that is terrible (and unethical?) form.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Yes if you withdrew it then you can definitely (and should) still present it at another conference. These things happen sometimes and as long as you formally withdrew it, there should be no issues. You just can't take credit twice for the same presentation.

I have heard about people authoring or co-authoring posters and then not attending the conference. This is probably just fine in the case of mentors who can't be around or people that made a good contribution to a project.

However, I personally have never taken credit on my CV for anything I was not physically present for. It doesn't sit well with me ethically. But, I don't begrudge others for taking credit as co-authors when they aren't there, because I understand that one can't travel to every conference. However, my personal opinion is that if you are the first author on a poster and you aren't there (e.g., having a co-author or student present), that is terrible (and unethical?) form.

Huh? If people didn't (rightfully) put the posters and presentations where they have co-authorship (because they made a significant contribution to the project) on their CVs and only listed them if they were at the conference, probably 80% of the presentations and posters listed on CVs would be void. There's more to a poster or presentation than presenting it--namely, actually conducting the research--and people should get credit for that as well. Plus, conference travel can be really expensive, and attending more than two or so conferences a year would be very cost-prohibitive for most people, especially students and RAs.

 

[4410]

During my undergraduate degree in psychology they actually had a course we could enroll in during our junior and senior year where we were research assistants for faculty members and graduate students. Anyway, to make a long story short...the faculty member that I worked for during that year had his research publicized in a Social Psychology journal and he did a presentation at APA. His research was over eye witness identification. I was listed as part of the research team on the publication and presentation. I was not able to attend the conference. When I originally applied doctoral programs in the 70's, I had this research listed on my applications as a research assistant for a publication and a presentation and the faculty member wrote me a letter of reference. I did not get accepted to doctoral programs back in the 70's, but I finished up a MS degree program in School Psychology and worked 25 years as a School Psychologist before returning to school to work on a doctoral degree in clinical psychology in 2006. I only applied to one local program due to being at a point in my career where I had little interest in moving or applying nationwide and I forgot about this research during my undergraduate degree and I don't even have it listed on my CV. After reviewing this post, I guess I should revise my CV and add this research from the 70's.

This was back in the early 70's when I was an undergraduate. Does this still happen under current undergraduate programs? Are there courses you take where you learn about research by being part of a research team with faculty supervision or mentorship? I don't believe at the undergraduate level, students are actually doing their own research but mostly it is faculty research that they participate in helping out. They may have a smaller study related to the larger study that the undergraduate student presents at a workshop, but they normally are not at a point where they do independent research. I agree with the prior poster in that if there is a requirement for being in person for the presentation, then many would not be able to have this listed on their CV.

I've also seen other situations where a doctoral level student has a team of undergraduates or master's students doing the bulk of the research for them, but the doctoral level student gets the majority of the credit for publication and presentation of the study or studies.

 

[deliciousgoose]

Yes if you withdrew it then you can definitely (and should) still present it at another conference. These things happen sometimes and as long as you formally withdrew it, there should be no issues. You just can't take credit twice for the same presentation.

I have heard about people authoring or co-authoring posters and then not attending the conference. This is probably just fine in the case of mentors who can't be around or people that made a good contribution to a project.

However, I personally have never taken credit on my CV for anything I was not physically present for. It doesn't sit well with me ethically. But, I don't begrudge others for taking credit as co-authors when they aren't there, because I understand that one can't travel to every conference. However, my personal opinion is that if you are the first author on a poster and you aren't there (e.g., having a co-author or student present), that is terrible (and unethical?) form.

This doesn't make any sense. As futureapppsy2 said, there is much more to a poster than just standing beside the board for an hour at a conference. If only the person who is standing next to the poster should get credit, why bother putting the other authors at all? What if the presenting author isn't first author but second or third author?

Anyway, I can sort of see your point about it being unethical as perhaps the reader would assume the first author presented, but that's why poster presentations on a CV often note the presenter.

E.G. I am first author and I presented:

Goose, D., Apppsy2, F. and Pants, H. (2012, March). Who did what? The ethics of authorship decisions. Poster presented at the annual convention of the Association for Sycophant Studies, New York City, USA.

Hamsterpants is third author and presented:

Goose, D., Apppsy2, F. and Pants, H. (2012, March). Who did what? The ethics of authorship decisions. Poster presented at the annual convention of the Association for Sycophant Studies, New York City, USA.

 

[Ollie123]

Actually I don't think most people list the presenter, though I have certainly seen some do it.

Personally, I don't think posters "count" for enough for it to matter much anyways. Pubs are what matter - posters are great for networking, but don't mean a whole lot beyond that given the peer-review is usually just kind of token. The actual act of presenting has always seemed fairly trivial to me compared to putting the poster together - if it weren't for the fact that I get to schmooze with people who may or may be hiring me some day, I probably wouldn't bother with them!

That said, lots of people list posters that others presented on their CV and I'm not sure I understand why that's a problem. It was perhaps different 30 years ago when it was common for labs to operate in isolation, but its not uncommon to see 10+ authors from a range of fields now. One of these might be (for example) the biostatistician that developed the analytic plan and spent weeks/months analyzing the data, but has little interest in going to a conference on some topic they have no interest in since they were simply interested in the numbers that could have been simply "Variable X and Variable Y" for all they care. I'm not sure what the rationale would be to exclude someone like that just because they didn't go to the conference, but may have contributed far more than many who do.

 

[Pragma]

Huh? If people didn't (rightfully) put the posters and presentations where they have co-authorship (because they made a significant contribution to the project) on their CVs and only listed them if they were at the conference, probably 80% of the presentations and posters listed on CVs would be void. There's more to a poster or presentation than presenting it--namely, actually conducting the research--and people should get credit for that as well. Plus, conference travel can be really expensive, and attending more than two or so conferences a year would be very cost-prohibitive for most people, especially students and RAs.

Got data?

It is my opinion. Why contribute to a poster or symposium if you aren't going to the conference? My hard stance is if you are first author and don't even go, that's bogus. My softer opinion is that you shouldn't list it as co-author either, but I wasn't absolute about that. Just my opinion. It is a grey area.

Case in point, I went to a conference where I was presenting 3 things. I had serious car trouble and missed the first one. I only list the other two, because I personally can't see how I can say I presented something I didn't present. My opinion.

By your logic, someone applying to graduate school with 10 posters on their CV could be doing so without ever having attended an academic conference. That scares me. Yes, APA and some conferences are expensive. So pick a local conference to go to. If a student can't make the time to attend one conference in or near town and present a poster, then I don't want them in my lab as a graduate student.

 

[Pragma]

This doesn't make any sense. As futureapppsy2 said, there is much more to a poster than just standing beside the board for an hour at a conference. If only the person who is standing next to the poster should get credit, why bother putting the other authors at all? What if the presenting author isn't first author but second or third author?

Anyway, I can sort of see your point about it being unethical as perhaps the reader would assume the first author presented, but that's why poster presentations on a CV often note the presenter.

E.G. I am first author and I presented:

Goose, D., Apppsy2, F. and Pants, H. (2012, March). Who did what? The ethics of authorship decisions. Poster presented at the annual convention of the Association for Sycophant Studies, New York City, USA.

Hamsterpants is third author and presented:

Goose, D., Apppsy2, F. and Pants, H. (2012, March). Who did what? The ethics of authorship decisions. Poster presented at the annual convention of the Association for Sycophant Studies, New York City, USA.

Like I said, opinion. With co-authors it is less important. If you are first author and don't even show up at the conference, I take issue.

Edit: Did you even read my post? I gave my opinion and I qualified it. How does it not make sense?

 

[Pragma]

Actually I don't think most people list the presenter, though I have certainly seen some do it.

Personally, I don't think posters "count" for enough for it to matter much anyways. Pubs are what matter - posters are great for networking, but don't mean a whole lot beyond that given the peer-review is usually just kind of token. The actual act of presenting has always seemed fairly trivial to me compared to putting the poster together - if it weren't for the fact that I get to schmooze with people who may or may be hiring me some day, I probably wouldn't bother with them!

That said, lots of people list posters that others presented on their CV and I'm not sure I understand why that's a problem. It was perhaps different 30 years ago when it was common for labs to operate in isolation, but its not uncommon to see 10+ authors from a range of fields now. One of these might be (for example) the biostatistician that developed the analytic plan and spent weeks/months analyzing the data, but has little interest in going to a conference on some topic they have no interest in since they were simply interested in the numbers that could have been simply "Variable X and Variable Y" for all they care. I'm not sure what the rationale would be to exclude someone like that just because they didn't go to the conference, but may have contributed far more than many who do.

Understandable, and they can make a case that they contributed significantly. If they were first author, I'd call BS.

Authorship is getting out of control to an extent. Places know that people need to present and publish increasingly on their CVs because of how important it is for admission to graduate school. But there are lots of people that take credit or co-author publications that probably have no business doing it.

I am fairly liberal and I have helped undergraduates publish papers. But I would never let them be first author if they didn't do most of the work and couldn't explain the entire thing to someone. That said, all of the undergrads I have worked with that have done it got first authorship because they worked their tails off doing it. Many have suggested that I should have been the first author because of all of the work and teaching I did, but I thought it was ethical to let these students have it.

Edit: The reason they are "token" is because of this over-inclusive attitude. Also, if I invest the time and money to go to a conference and present the work i have been doing, why should someone who crunched a few numbers and didn't take the time and money get the same credit? Going there and presenting it DOES mean something. If you list a poster on your CV and can't explain it to someone in 5 minutes, you should ask yourself if you really contributed enough to understand the study.

As I said, for co-authors it is different. I can't fathom how anyone could take credit for first author and not go. Unethical in my opinion.

 

[Ollie123]

Oh I definitely agree regarding first authorship and the broader issue of authorship spiraling out of control. I'm in no way arguing for "token" authorships...I'm just making the point that physical presence at the conference is also quite token and doesn't really say a whole lot about what someone contributed.

Only time I've seen first author not presenting is in situations where some sort of emergency came up (death in the family, etc.), in which case the PI has presented it. I'm also assuming we're largely talking about major national or international academic conferences here, with presentations by serious academics. If we're talking about undergrads first-authoring something at their college "Honors student Colloquia" to put on their CV and then not even showing up than yeah, that's BS. If a fellow grad student did the vast majority of the work analyzing/assembling/etc. a poster for a study I helped with, and then got in an accident and asked me to stand next to it during the poster session as second author....that seems not even worth caring about. Again, I guess I just don't think of "presenter" as a particularly substantive contribution on its own.

 

[Pragma]

Oh I definitely agree regarding first authorship and the broader issue of authorship spiraling out of control. I'm in no way arguing for "token" authorships...I'm just making the point that physical presence at the conference is also quite token and doesn't really say a whole lot about what someone contributed.

Only time I've seen first author not presenting is in situations where some sort of emergency came up (death in the family, etc.), in which case the PI has presented it. I'm also assuming we're largely talking about major national or international academic conferences here, with presentations by serious academics. If we're talking about undergrads first-authoring something at their college "Honors student Colloquia" to put on their CV and then not even showing up than yeah, that's BS. If a fellow grad student did the vast majority of the work analyzing/assembling/etc. a poster for a study I helped with, and then got in an accident and asked me to stand next to it during the poster session as second author....that seems not even worth caring about. Again, I guess I just don't think of "presenter" as a particularly substantive contribution on its own.

I think it means something. You need to be able to talk about your work intelligently.

 

[Pragma]

I'd like to throw out a larger question to everyone reading this thread. I don't know the absolute answer, but I have an opinion.

Let's say undergrad or RA does most of the background prep to develop hypotheses, writes most of the intro, or prepares most of the poster. But, they have no idea how to run, let's say, the logistic regression needed to test their hypotheses.

Enter graduate student who has taken appropriate coursework to understand these things, who then does the analyses and writes the results section.

In my opinion, NEITHER of these two did enough to get first authorship, and I don't know who should. I can see letting udnergrad or RA have the credit, but is it ethical for them to present when they have not been trained to understand the strengths and limits of their statistical method?

I think that the scope of projects is important, and that this project is inappropriate for undergrad or RA if they are not well-versed in the statistics they need to test their research question.

Edit: So I am saying that how undergrads or RAs are trained in labs matters here, even for authorship. If they are "trained" on logistic regression by someone saying "click here, click here, and look at this number" then I think it is a dis-service for them and the broader academic community if they take ownership as first author. Someone else should take charge and they should be a co-author. They appear more knowledgable than they actually are. If training consisted of a lot of time with the undergrad or RA so that they undertood logistic regression, what the alternatives to logistic regression are and why this method is chosen, appropriate ways to test assumptions, etc, then it is a different story. That person should take credit because they really worked hard and learned something. If somone contacts them with questions about the pub or poster, they probably can answer them.

 

[Ollie123]

I obviously agree its important to be able to talk about the work intelligently, I'm just not sure that physical presence is an indication of that😉 ...especially regarding co-authors in attendance, who may or may not even end up talking to anyone about it.

RE: the situation you described, I think the devil is in the details. I've been in a similar situation before with a post-bac. I basically just "taught" them the analysis. Not to a point where they would likely be capable of running one independently, but enough for them to understand it and be comfortable discussing it. The grad student definitely wouldn't deserve first author for simply running the analysis, though its a bit more grey for the undergrad. Your particular example was a fairly simple analysis (logistic regression), which to me indicates that if the person isn't capable of understanding that with guidance, they simply have NO idea about stats and aren't ready to be presenting at all. In contrast, its quite common for a senior faculty member to give a talk on a study he/she was PI on that involved analyzing nested variables within a GWAS that took a team of biostatisticians a year to figure out, and the PI can perhaps explain it conceptually but wouldn't even dream of running themselves. That is obviously a vastly different scenario, and I think most/all would agree the PI should be first author.

So again...context dependent, but if it were me, I would probably run it, but under the guise of "teaching" them and let them take first author as long as they "got it" (nothing out of the ordinary there, as that is how these things are supposed to work). If we hit an impasse where they were saying "I want to be first author, but can't do anything related to the results" then its time to think about switching the author order or withdrawing the submission until they get their act together.

 

[Pragma]

I obviously agree its important to be able to talk about the work intelligently, I'm just not sure that physical presence is an indication of that😉 ...especially regarding co-authors in attendance, who may or may not even end up talking to anyone about it.

RE: the situation you described, I think the devil is in the details. I've been in a similar situation before with a post-bac. I basically just "taught" them the analysis. Not to a point where they would likely be capable of running one independently, but enough for them to understand it and be comfortable discussing it. The grad student definitely wouldn't deserve first author for simply running the analysis, though its a bit more grey for the undergrad. Your particular example was a fairly simple analysis (logistic regression), which to me indicates that if the person isn't capable of understanding that with guidance, they simply have NO idea about stats and aren't ready to be presenting at all. In contrast, its quite common for a senior faculty member to give a talk on a study he/she was PI on that involved analyzing nested variables within a GWAS that took a team of biostatisticians a year to figure out, and the PI can perhaps explain it conceptually but wouldn't even dream of running themselves. That is obviously a vastly different scenario, and I think most/all would agree the PI should be first author.

So again...context dependent, but if it were me, I would probably run it, but under the guise of "teaching" them and let them take first author as long as they "got it" (nothing out of the ordinary there, as that is how these things are supposed to work). If we hit an impasse where they were saying "I want to be first author, but can't do anything related to the results" then its time to think about switching the author order or withdrawing the submission until they get their act together.

Well you don't know if someone can if they don't even show up. I think that engaging in a conference and presenting a poster is an important skill. I understand that some people are non-chalant about it, but then posters end up not meaning anything at all. I think they do mean something and there is a purpose for it. If you head up a project and are first author, you need to go present it, IMO.

Yes you bring up good points about the situation. However, I question whether students or post-baccs should be first author on even a simple analysis like logistic regression without proper training. What you described does not seem like proper training to me (if they can't even run one independently). They should stick to analyses that they do understand if that is the case. Nothing wrong with a t-test for undergraduates.

 

[Pragma]

You can definitely resubmit the poster! Actually presenting the same poster twice is where it gets sketchy, but even that can be justified in some (rare) circumstances, if they are two completely different audiences (say, presenting something at a local conference and then at a national conference).

It is unethical to present the same data in the same way at two different conferences. This is padding. See the Ethics code under "Duplicate publication of data" (8.13)

 

[4410]

It is unethical to present the same data in the same way at two different conferences. This is padding. See the Ethics code under "Duplicate publication of data" (8.13)

I guess there are many out there in violation. Seems that many presenters present the same powerpoint at multiple conferences with some minor changes. Many present at local or State conferences to practice for National conferences with bigger audiences.

 

[Pragma]

I guess there are many out there in violation. Seems that many presenters present the same powerpoint at multiple conferences with some minor changes. Many present at local or State conferences to practice for National conferences with bigger audiences.

If they are listing them as separate presentations on their CV with different titles, then it is a huge issue. If it is truly practice and they are not making it look like they are presenting two different presentations, it is less of an issue.

I am just saying it how I was taught. Obviously sometimes people will present some data they are working on and later on write it up for publication. But the key is if it is in THE SAME WAY. If they do some different things, then it is a different presentation.

I suppose it is a good thing that we don't have the presentation police out there. But, people over-crediting themselves is a reality and it makes CVs unrepresentative of what some people actually know and can contribute.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

If they are listing them as separate presentations on their CV with different titles, then it is a huge issue. If it is truly practice and they are not making it look like they are presenting two different presentations, it is less of an issue.

I am just saying it how I was taught. Obviously sometimes people will present some data they are working on and later on write it up for publication. But the key is if it is in THE SAME WAY. If they do some different things, then it is a different presentation.

I suppose it is a good thing that we don't have the presentation police out there. But, people over-crediting themselves is a reality and it makes CVs unrepresentative of what some people actually know and can contribute.

I would agree. If a project or talk is first presented at a local research day, for example, and is then presented at a national conference, it should only be listed once on the CV unless something substantive was changed (e.g., data and analyses added/additional hypotheses tested).

 

[Ollie123]

I think its several steps too far to say "It is unethical to present the same data in the same way at two different conferences". I fully agree it should only go on the CV once, but even the ethics code itself doesn't say you can't present things more than once. In fact, it actually makes it quite clear you can PUBLISH things more than once, assuming relevant parties agree and there is proper acknowledgement. I'm not sure how it could be construed as "Presenting your APA poster at your university symposia is an ethics violation".

8.13 Duplicate Publication of Data
Psychologists do not publish, as original data, data that have been previously published. This does not preclude republishing data when they are accompanied by proper acknowledgment.

 

[hamsterpants]

Thankfully, I withdrew the poster and will not list it in on my CV. I was able to figure out I couldn't afford to go right after my abstract was accepted and so I didn't finish the actual poster. No one else I know was going to this conference and I wouldn't have wanted someone else to present anyway because I get a lot out of presenting (and part of the reason I wanted to go to this conference was to travel to this country).

anyway, I have gone ahead and re-submitted the study to another conference. Not as exciting a locale but I just want to get it out there.

 

[Pragma]

I think its several steps too far to say "It is unethical to present the same data in the same way at two different conferences". I fully agree it should only go on the CV once, but even the ethics code itself doesn't say you can't present things more than once. In fact, it actually makes it quite clear you can PUBLISH things more than once, assuming relevant parties agree and there is proper acknowledgement. I'm not sure how it could be construed as "Presenting your APA poster at your university symposia is an ethics violation".

If you are taking credit as if they are two different presentations of original data, then that is how faculty taught me. Yes if you acknowledge a source of data appropriately and aren't making it look like you did two studies instead of one, then it is fine. I am talking about someone presenting the same thing at two conferences and crediting themselves for two different research contributions.

I have seen people put abstracts from the conference poster that were published AND the presentation on a CV. Problem! I have also seen someone present an abstract as a publication when it wasn't even a pub (you are supposed to say [Abstract] on your CV). It is important not to inflate your credentials and research experience.