ICCB 2017 Review Process
The Scientific Committee strove to attain a transparent and objective review process that involved:
- Double-blind process;
- A diverse Scientific Committee and reviewers pool with an emphasis on gender diversity, and diversity of discipline and regional expertise;
- Two reviewers assigned per abstract based on expertise rather than random assignment;
- Normalization of scores from reviewers to account for the fact that some reviewers score systematically high while other systematically low.
More than 1,300 abstracts were submitted for ICCB 2017. Our reviewer pool of 100 conservation scientists accepted approximately 73 percent of all submitted abstracts after careful evaluation. Venue capacity limited our capacity to accept moer abstracts. Unfortunately, we could not accommodate all the excellent abstracts that we have received.