Avoid Conflicts of Interest
As a reviewer of a SIGGRAPH submission, you have a certain power over the reviewing process. It is important for you to avoid any conflict of interest. There should be absolutely no question about the impartiality of your review. Thus, if you are assigned a submission where your review would create a possible conflict of interest, you should return the submission and not submit a review.
Conflicts of interest include (but are not limited to) situations in which:
- You work at the same institution as one of the submitters.
- You have been directly involved in the work and will be receiving credit in some way. For example, if you are a member of the author’s thesis committee, and the submission is about their thesis work, then you are involved.
- You suspect that others might see a conflict of interest in your involvement. For example, even though Microsoft Research in Seattle and Beijing are in some ways more distant than Berkeley and MIT, there is likely to be a perception that they are “both Microsoft,” so folks from one should not review submissions from the other.
- You have collaborated with one of the submitters in the past three years (more or less). Collaboration is usually defined as having written a paper or grant proposal together, although you should use your judgment.
- You were the MFA/MS/PhD advisor of one of the submitters or the MFA/MS/PhD advisee of one of the submitters. Funding agencies typically consider advisees/advisors to represent a lifetime conflict of interest. SIGGRAPH has traditionally been more flexible than this, but you should think carefully before reviewing a submission you know to be written by a former advisee/advisor.
But if you recognize the work or the contributor and feel it could present a conflict of interest, send the submission back to the General Submission chair as soon as possible so that someone else can be found to review it.