AfriCHI General Criteria & Code of Practice
Each track has specific review criteria. Along with these AfriCHI has important criteria that recognise that African perspectives, experiences and knowledges significantly advance HCI; and, that Africans’ international participation in HCI is improved by providing excellent feedback on works submitted for review. Thus, firstly, we appreciate contributions that:
- Propose and/or account for relevance to African contexts and perspectives
- Cite related African works within and beyond HCI/Interaction design (along with literature that is typically associated with a topic).
Secondly, we emphasise ethical practices guided by the Committee on Publication Ethics: http://publicationethics.org/files/Ethical_guidelines_for_peer_reviewers_0.pdf. This includes, but is not limited to:
- Maintaining the confidentiality of submissions: All people exposed to submissions to AfriCHI’16 commit to maintaining the confidentiality of submissions during review process. Only accepted camera-ready, final submissions will be published and disseminated and these will be kept confidential until the date of the conference.
- Removing conflicts of interest: we shall ensure that there will be no conflicts of interest (e.g. removing ourselves completely from review process in which we or our allies submit to).
- Setting and monitoring the use of standard and specific selection criteria.
- Ensuring review committees and juries assessing submissions comprise of diverse perspectives and expertise.
Double-blind Anonymous, Peer-Reviewed Selection
All Papers and Notes, and Extended Abstracts for Posters and Gumzo Pictorials are double-blind, peer-reviewed by three to four independent experts, and authors receive formal feedback. The identities of reviewers and authors are anonymous in double-blind reviews. The chairs associated with a submission will know the names of both authors and reviewers but will keep these confidential. This process aims to achieve non-partisan, fair and ethical reviews. If you have concerns about reviews of a submission you should contact the chairs of the relevant track and you should never contact any person who you infer or guess might be a reviewer. Reviewers have agreed to immediately and honestly discuss with the chairs of tracks any relationships that might cause bias and will never discuss the paper with any person who they infer is an author (unless the Technical Program Chairs have permitted the track chair to make a special agreement between them).
AfriCHI’16 applies a revise and resubmit process to Papers and Notes to ensure a broad range of high quality published works. To understand this two-round process, please read information in the specific call for Papers and Notes and Gumzo papers and notes and ensure you submit by the first submission deadline.
Single-blind Anonymous, Juried Selection
AfriCHI uses single-blind, anonymous expert juries for selecting Demonstrations and in the Masters and Doctoral Consortium. A jury of reviewers assesses submissions and provides light feedback to their authors. Authors submitting to single-blind anonymous are not made aware of reviewers’ identities; however, the jury is aware of the authors’ identities. Juried content is not expected to make the same level of contribution as fully refereed content and recognises that knowing authors’ identities may assist in assessing submissions while protecting the rights of reviewers.
Non-anonymous Juried, Selection
AfriCHI uses non-anonymous juried selection in the Gumzo track when language, communication and genre issues preclude anonymity and when a paper and note is not involved. In such cases the chair may initiate a conversation which will assist the author or performer to revise the written component of the submission.
AfriCHI uses curated selection for Workshops, Courses and Panels. Curated selection will often involve independent juries of expert reviewers, however final decisions to accept are strongly influenced by achieving a balanced and attractive programme. Thus, decisions will be affected by the scope of submissions; interests and gaps that emerge across the programme tracks; and, the enthusiasm of participants to initial calls, such as the number of applicants who wish to participate in a workshop or course. Curated selection also includes interventions by chairs to improve the cohesion of the programme; for instance, to invite submissions for a specific panel, or suggest that different people who propose similar Workshop topics work together. Only limited formal feedback may be given to authors of submissions with initial selection decisions.
Reviewers & Meta-Reviewers
AfriCHI’s programme committee includes over 100 experts in HCI and related fields throughout the world who have agreed to contribute to reviewing. The basic criteria to review are experience working in Africa and/or on African projects and recognised expertise in HCI/related fields. Meta-reviewers and panelists on review juries must also have a strong track record in publishing with (other) African scholars or collaborating extensively with (other) African practitioners. We match submission’s topic and form to a reviewer’s’ expertise to assign submissions for review and aim to ensure balance and representation of perspectives amongst reviewers in double blind peer-review or on juries. If you have any concerns about reviewers or reviewing processes or practices please contact the technical program chair without delay.