Each submitted abstract will be subjected to review and scoring by three independent reviewers who have expertise in the specific subject area. After adjusting for differences in scoring among individual reviewers, abstracts will be ranked on the basis of their overall score, and available slots for spoken and poster presentations will be allocated according to merit using all submissions combined, taking into account presentation preferences.

Reviewers will apply the following four criteria to judge abstract submissions. Each will be given equal weight. The form the reviewers will use is available for reference (Abstract Review Form).

You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader to view this file. Download it by clicking this button:

1. Originality: abstracts containing significant new findings will be given higher scores than those that describe updates or modifications to older findings.
2. Quality: abstracts that significantly advance the conceptual foundation of marine mammal science and demonstrate the use of sound scientific methodology will be given higher scores.
3. Importance: abstracts that present significant new information about a subject or species, or that add relevance to the broader context framed by the subject heading, will receive higher scores.
4. Presentation: higher scores will be awarded to abstracts that clearly state the specific objectives to be attained, the methods used, the main results, and provide a concise interpretation of the findings.

Ensure that your abstract

1. provides sufficient detail for the reviewer to evaluate the work,
2. describes scientific methods and results, and
3. describes conservation, management, or legal issues that are appropriate for a scientific meeting.