This year (2024), I was invited to serve as a reviewer for CHI, and other conferences. To approach this role thoughtfully, I sought guidance from experienced colleagues and discussed with friends what it truly means to be a constructive reviewer. Through these conversations, we realized that many reviewers might not be familiar with some key resources that are crucial for effectively supporting our community.
I’ve compiled a few helpful links here. If you’re new to reviewing or haven’t encountered these resources before, I encourage you to take a moment to explore them. And if you find yourself inviting new reviewers in the future, please consider sharing these links to them.
- Understand the contributions to CHI
- Official guide to Reviewing Paper for CHI
- Ken Hinckley’s Thoughts on Paper Review or you can read his paper: Hinckley, Ken. “So you’re a program committee member now: On excellence in reviews and meta-reviews and championing submitted work that has merit.” (2015).
From these resources, I draw two essential messages, though I still recommend reading the materials firsthand to fully understand the expectations of a reviewer:
- Prioritizing Contribution to HCI: The main criterion in any review should be the paper’s contribution to the HCI field. By focusing on this, we can ensure our feedback and evaluations support the broader goals of advancing the discipline.
- Adopting a Supportive Mindset: Enter each review with the goal of helping the paper reach the standards for acceptance. Rather than seeking flaws to justify rejection, focus on providing constructive feedback that can strengthen the submission and benefit the authors.