@inproceedings{gao-etal-2019-rebuttal,
title = "Does My Rebuttal Matter? Insights from a Major {NLP} Conference",
author = "Gao, Yang and
Eger, Steffen and
Kuznetsov, Ilia and
Gurevych, Iryna and
Miyao, Yusuke",
editor = "Burstein, Jill and
Doran, Christy and
Solorio, Thamar",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North {A}merican Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers)",
month = jun,
year = "2019",
address = "Minneapolis, Minnesota",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/N19-1129",
doi = "10.18653/v1/N19-1129",
pages = "1274--1290",
abstract = "Peer review is a core element of the scientific process, particularly in conference-centered fields such as ML and NLP. However, only few studies have evaluated its properties empirically. Aiming to fill this gap, we present a corpus that contains over 4k reviews and 1.2k author responses from ACL-2018. We quantitatively and qualitatively assess the corpus. This includes a pilot study on paper weaknesses given by reviewers and on quality of author responses. We then focus on the role of the rebuttal phase, and propose a novel task to predict after-rebuttal (i.e., final) scores from initial reviews and author responses. Although author responses do have a marginal (and statistically significant) influence on the final scores, especially for borderline papers, our results suggest that a reviewer{'}s final score is largely determined by her initial score and the distance to the other reviewers{'} initial scores. In this context, we discuss the conformity bias inherent to peer reviewing, a bias that has largely been overlooked in previous research. We hope our analyses will help better assess the usefulness of the rebuttal phase in NLP conferences.",
}
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="gao-etal-2019-rebuttal">
<titleInfo>
<title>Does My Rebuttal Matter? Insights from a Major NLP Conference</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Yang</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Gao</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Steffen</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Eger</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Ilia</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Kuznetsov</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Iryna</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Gurevych</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Yusuke</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Miyao</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2019-06</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers)</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jill</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Burstein</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Christy</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Doran</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Thamar</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Solorio</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Minneapolis, Minnesota</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>Peer review is a core element of the scientific process, particularly in conference-centered fields such as ML and NLP. However, only few studies have evaluated its properties empirically. Aiming to fill this gap, we present a corpus that contains over 4k reviews and 1.2k author responses from ACL-2018. We quantitatively and qualitatively assess the corpus. This includes a pilot study on paper weaknesses given by reviewers and on quality of author responses. We then focus on the role of the rebuttal phase, and propose a novel task to predict after-rebuttal (i.e., final) scores from initial reviews and author responses. Although author responses do have a marginal (and statistically significant) influence on the final scores, especially for borderline papers, our results suggest that a reviewer’s final score is largely determined by her initial score and the distance to the other reviewers’ initial scores. In this context, we discuss the conformity bias inherent to peer reviewing, a bias that has largely been overlooked in previous research. We hope our analyses will help better assess the usefulness of the rebuttal phase in NLP conferences.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">gao-etal-2019-rebuttal</identifier>
<identifier type="doi">10.18653/v1/N19-1129</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/N19-1129</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2019-06</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>1274</start>
<end>1290</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Does My Rebuttal Matter? Insights from a Major NLP Conference
%A Gao, Yang
%A Eger, Steffen
%A Kuznetsov, Ilia
%A Gurevych, Iryna
%A Miyao, Yusuke
%Y Burstein, Jill
%Y Doran, Christy
%Y Solorio, Thamar
%S Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers)
%D 2019
%8 June
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Minneapolis, Minnesota
%F gao-etal-2019-rebuttal
%X Peer review is a core element of the scientific process, particularly in conference-centered fields such as ML and NLP. However, only few studies have evaluated its properties empirically. Aiming to fill this gap, we present a corpus that contains over 4k reviews and 1.2k author responses from ACL-2018. We quantitatively and qualitatively assess the corpus. This includes a pilot study on paper weaknesses given by reviewers and on quality of author responses. We then focus on the role of the rebuttal phase, and propose a novel task to predict after-rebuttal (i.e., final) scores from initial reviews and author responses. Although author responses do have a marginal (and statistically significant) influence on the final scores, especially for borderline papers, our results suggest that a reviewer’s final score is largely determined by her initial score and the distance to the other reviewers’ initial scores. In this context, we discuss the conformity bias inherent to peer reviewing, a bias that has largely been overlooked in previous research. We hope our analyses will help better assess the usefulness of the rebuttal phase in NLP conferences.
%R 10.18653/v1/N19-1129
%U https://aclanthology.org/N19-1129
%U https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/N19-1129
%P 1274-1290
Markdown (Informal)
[Does My Rebuttal Matter? Insights from a Major NLP Conference](https://aclanthology.org/N19-1129) (Gao et al., NAACL 2019)
ACL
- Yang Gao, Steffen Eger, Ilia Kuznetsov, Iryna Gurevych, and Yusuke Miyao. 2019. Does My Rebuttal Matter? Insights from a Major NLP Conference. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers), pages 1274–1290, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Association for Computational Linguistics.