I'm submitting an abstract for a conference which will be later this year. At this stage, I haven't started any research, so all I have to go on is my proposal, but the research should be underway by the time of the conference.

I just wondered how others handled this in their 1st year. Is it best to write an abstract that's clearly just talking about a proposal, or should it be a bit more vague, to take into account the fact that I'll hopefully have some preliminary data to mention by the time the conference comes around?

Any advice gratefully received!

It depends on the conference and field of study, but as a rule of thumb it is not very well seen if you submit an abstract about a study that hasn't been run yet. It is also difficult for the reviewers to decide if your work will be worth being presented or not - since you don't have results so far.

That said, I've submitted an abstract in my first year about a study that wasn't completed yet. I clearly summarized method and preliminary results, explaining that only a part (ca. 70%) of the analysis was completed at the moment of the abstract submission, but that the work would be done by the time of the conference. They accepted it, even though one reviewer (abstracts for the conference were blind-reviewed) commented that it was a bit risky to accept the paper, since results weren't complete yet.

How important is this conference for you? Couldn't you apply to another one - submitting the abstract after you've at least begun with the study?

w

Thanks for your advice. To be honest, I'd be more than happy not to submit anything to conferences until I'm further on, but the expectation is coming from my department. I had always pictured conferences and presentations coming much later in the process.

I absolutely get it, Chickpea! I also had that pressure, and I think it is very important indeed to start publishing and presenting at conferences as soon as possible...maybe you could submit now an abstract to a minor post-graduate conference, to have a first outcome, and then plan a bigger conference for next year, submitting the abstract in a few months, when you'll have the first results...?

That makes sense and I'd definitely be glad to start small! The conference I'm looking at is a major one and the recommendation to submit has come from my supervisor, so I've emailed him with my concerns about having nothing really to present. The last thing I want to do is start with a bad experience and looking like a nitwit!

There's huge variety between fields as to what a conference submission looks like - is yours at the "300 words" or "4+ pages" end of the scale?

Just a maximum 300 words abstract at this stage, HazyJane.

I've just heard from him now, Simon - he thinks it is fine to submit an outline at this stage and says it won't matter too much that the research will be 'work in progress' at the time of the conference.

I was always told to keep it vague in the line of 'results will be presented...' without saying what the results were (since I didn't have any!), even though it often states in the guidelines not to do that.

I have published a number of papers and was under the same pressure at the start of my Phd.

To be honest I would wait a little, ideally you want to be ahead and publish results with about a 6 month delay. As unfortunately people do steal ideas! I do agree with others though that publishing will help you later especially making the case for originality and contribution to knowledge.

It's unfortunate that all the conference deadlines seem to cluster together, with quite long lead times, so if you miss one, you've probably missed them all for the year.

I'd be a little nervous about submitting an abstract about something that I hadn't even started yet, unless I was definitely sure enough will have been done by the time of the conference to make for a decent presentation, and lead to a fairly timely publication. I have, however, submitted abstracts based on 'work in progress' which has been sufficiently advanced by the conference date. There can be a problem with convincing reviewers if you don't actually have any preliminary numbers though (if relevant).

One other option is that some conferences (at least in medical sciences) sometimes have a last minute call for 'late breaking abstracts' maybe just a month before the conference. That might be a way around it. Though usually these will be given over for quite high profile stuff (or at least that's the impression I get, I may be wrong). If you do this, though, you are likely to miss out on early bird discounts for registration.

The other thing you might like to check is what your training budget/allowance is. It would be unfortunate if going to a conference in year 1 deprived you of the opportunity to do so at a later date when you might value the experience more.

Thanks everyone for your input - it has really given me food for thought. I've had a look at previous abstracts for this particular conference, and every last one of them is structured into methods/results/conclusions, making me think there is no way they will accept an abstract based on a proposal. My supervisor, however, thinks it's a good idea to submit something anyway. The deal regarding funding is that the uni will only pay if we're presenting, so I guess he is seeing it as a way for me to get the experience of attending a large conference. I just don't see how I will be accepted at this stage, though. I have the feeling that the only thing for it is to go through the motions, produce an abstract, run it past my supervisor and submit it if he's happy with it, while not personally having any expectation that it will be accepted.

Thanks for posting this query, Chickpea. I'm under the exact same pressure, right now. I'm only six months in and all I've got is my proposal (if you can call it that). I'm quite mortified at the idea of presenting my "plans" as it were....I wonder if I can convince my supervisory panel to let me skip it, this year; however mine are saying the same thing yours is.