CALL FOR ABSTRACTS 2005 IDEC Annual Conference Savannah, Georgia March 1-6, 2005

CALL FOR ABSTRACTS 2005 IDEC Annual Conference Savannah, Georgia March 1-6, 2005 COVER SHEET Please complete the form below for each abstract submitted. The author's name(s) should appear on this sheet ONLY. Notice of acceptance or rejection will be sent to the contact person. It is the responsibility of the contact person to notify all participants regarding the presentation at the conference. Incomplete and improperly formatted packets will not be reviewed. Category of Submission (check one) Please include the following Paper Entry fee Panel One cover sheet Poster Four copies of abstract Other Four copies of narrative Other Information (check one) One copy of abstract on disk IDEC Member If desired, self-addressed, stamped post Non IDEC Member card for arrival notification Title of Submission: Contact Author Name: Address: Contact Author s Phone: E-mail (must be included): Additional Author(s): Address(es): Fax: MAIN HEADINGS Please check one: (Include in header of abstract) Communications and Media Practice Teaching/Pedagogy Technological Specialties Theory and Research Conference will provide projection equipment for all papers or panels. (No laptops will be provided for posters) Overhead Projector Slide Projector Data Projector Other: SUB-HEADINGS Please check as many as apply: (Include in header of abstract) Animation Computers Creative Process Criticism Current Issues Curricular Development Design Specialties Diversity Environmental Quality Gender Issues Global Issues Green Design History Human Behavior Lighting Materials and Fabrication Research Methods Special Populations Theoretical and Conceptual Development SUBMISSION CATEGORIES

PAPER PANEL POSTER TIME FRAMES A paper is formal in structure and format. The goal may be to present a question or issue that is structured as conceptual, analytical, empirical research, or applied research and is grounded in a systematic process. The question or issue may be descriptive and/or prescriptive in analysis and involve interior issues of theory, education, pedagogy, or practice related to the built environment. The author will present issues or topics derived from a critical question or speculative subject matter, such as theoretical models, with the intention of advancing a treatise, position, or state of the interior design discipline or practice. Papers may be finite and conclusive, providing descriptive and/or conditional findings to the audience. Or, the paper may be directed toward a public discourse that provides critique and feedback, to think reflectively and refine the work. Accepted enabling the author papers must post a Billboard for their session during the meeting. Details can be found in the last section of the Call for Abstracts. Panels are interactive and less formal in structure and format. The goal is to stimulate interaction on a relevant topic or issue of interior design pedagogy, practice, theory, history, and/or criticism. The author develops the background and framework to engage panel members and the audience in discussion and exchange, to stimulate creative thinking, and to garner additional insight and reflection by participants. Subjects that are innovative or creative or controversial in approach either as application or conceptual development of current issues or topics in interior-design education, pedagogy, professional practice, as well as theory, or criticism are appropriate as presentations. A poster strives to foster exchange between members through visual images, text, and/or diagrams. This format offers experiential interaction and directs audience/author engagement or allows independent viewing. The author(s) develops visual information that expresses ideas or tracks a process relevant to interior design teaching, pedagogy, method/process, theory, practice, history, or criticism. The audience comments, questions, or seeks dialogue about the content or interpretation of the topic with the author(s) to advance the idea or further apply the process. Papers are allotted a total of 45 minutes; allow 30 minutes for delivery and 15 minutes for questions and discussion. Panels may use the entire time. Posters will be presented simultaneously throughout one day, and authors must be present during the assigned Poster Session.

SUBMISSION INFORMATION IDENTIFICATION DUE DATE SUBMISSION FEES SEND TO REVIEW PROCESS NOTIFICATION ATTENDANCE AWARDS QUESTIONS PLEASE NOTE To assure blind review, hard copy submissions must NOT include author(s) name(s), institutional affiliation(s), or other forms of identification. SUBMISSIONS WITH ANY TYPE OF IDENTIFICATION WILL NOT BE REVIEWED. Submissions must be postmarked no later than September 15, 2005. Submissions with postmarks after this date will not be reviewed. No fax copies or e-mail abstracts will be accepted. A maximum of three different submissions per person is allowed. Make checks payable to IDEC and include with submission(s). Submissions received without the appropriate fee will not be reviewed. Submission fees are non-refundable. $30.00 for each submission (IDEC Members Only) $60.00 for each Non-Member submission $15.00 for each submission for graduate students (must include signed statement on the school s letterhead to verify status. Graduate students must be the first authors on any submission at this rate). Nancy G. Miller and G. Marie Gentry IDEC Conference Abstract Review Coordinators University of Arkansas 118 HOEC Fayetteville, AR 72701 All submissions are blind reviewed by a panel of IDEC members organized by the Conference Abstract Review Coordinators. Please note: To ensure blind review, hard copy submissions must not include authors' names, institutional or business affiliation, or other forms of identification. The hard copies of the abstracts are used in the review process only. The Abstract Content (see document later in this packet) shows where authors name(s) and affiliation(s) are positioned on the electronic copy. Note that this information appears ONLY in the abstract that is submitted on diskette. If the abstract is accepted, the diskette copy is printed in the Conference Proceedings. Submissions not following the instructions in the 2005 Call for Abstracts (roughly patterned after APA guidelines) will not be reviewed. Notice of acceptance or rejection, along with a summary of reviewers' comments, will be mailed out to the contact author on November 15, 2004. All presenters must be registered and be in attendance at the conference. Regional Chairs Awards for Best Paper and Best Poster will be presented at the Annual IDEC Awards Banquet at the end of Conference. To determine the winners of these awards, Chairs from each region evaluate the ten abstracts in each category that receive the highest scores during the initial review process by the Conference Abstract Review Committee. Nann: 479.575.4645 or ngmille@uark.edu Marie: 479.575.2578 or gmgentry@uark.edu SUBMISSIONS NOT FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS WILL NOT BE REVIEWED.

WRITERS GUIDELINES ALL SUBMISSIONS ABSTRACT 1. One (1) cover sheet (provided) for each separate submission. 2. Four (4) single spaced copies of abstract (with no identification included). 3. Four (4) copies of narrative (with no identification included). Staple pages of Abstract and Narrative together in the upper left-hand corner with the narrative following the abstract. If graphics are included with the narrative, they should be stapled at the end of the narrative. 4. Abstract on Computer Diskette with label on disc. 5. Submission in binders or folders will not be accepted. The abstract summarizes the content of the paper to be presented and enables readers to quickly understand the purpose, methods, and findings. See Abstract Content (see below) for word limits and content. PLEASE NOTE: Name and affiliation are placed between the title and first section on the electronic version of the abstract only. If the abstract is accepted, the diskette copy will be printed in the Conference Proceedings. The hard copy of the abstracts is utilized only in the review process and must not carry any identification. ABSTRACT Maximum: 500 Minimum: 250 WORD Minimum of 50 words for Purpose or Issue Section. Overall word count LIMITS for the abstract does not include references, citations, and titles. Place word count in header in the upper right hand corner of the first page. ABSTRACT CONTENT ELECTRONIC COPY Required content and subdivisions: 1. Purpose or Issue: (50 word minimum) 2. Methodology or Process/Contexts: 3. Summary of Results or Summary: 4. References Those submissions not following American Psychological Association (APA), 5 th edition for references and citations will not be reviewed. (See example included in Call for Abstracts.) On the diskette, the author s name(s) and affiliation will be inserted between the title of the abstract and the first section of the submission. The electronic copy will be used to prepare the Conference Proceedings. The file should be saved using Microsoft Word (on a PC formatted disc) or in a RTF format. Submissions should be on a 3.5 diskette with the following information on the diskette label: 1. Contact information: Author s name, phone number, email address. 2. Title of Submission.

NARRATIVE The narrative expands the abstract to provide reviewers with more information from which to evaluate submissions; it is not published in the Proceedings. NARRATIVE Maximum: 1,500 WORD Word count does not include references, citations, and titles. Place the LIMIT word count in the upper right hand corner of the first page of the narrative. NARRATIVE FORMAT ILLUSTRATIONS Format must follow the guidelines found in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA) 5 th edition. For references, citations (See example following this document. Those submissions not following APA guidelines will not be reviewed. 1. In header, include main heading and appropriate sub-headings. Headings must correspond to indications on Cover Sheet. Use 10 pt. Times New Roman Font for header. 2. Use APA format for page numbers, paragraph style and spacing, and reference citations. Authors are strongly encouraged to include illustrations and addenda with the narrative. However, no graphics of any type will appear with the abstract in the Conference Proceedings. Up to five (5) illustrations, charts, drawings, or photos (printed on 8.5 x 11 sheets of paper) should be used to further clarify the reviewer s understanding of the content. Illustrations should be referenced in the narrative, appropriately labeled, and stapled behind the Narrative. Illustrations will not be returned.

Abstract Content and Format (Note that the title is centered, 12 pt. font and important words begin in upper case letters.) (If this were the electronic copy of the abstract, the author(s) name and affiliation would be added here. Flush left, Bold, 12 pt. Times new Roman.) Purpose or Issue Purpose or Issue is the title of the first section of the abstract. Notice that the title of the abstract and the section title are centered on the page, italicized, 12 pt. Times New Roman font, and important words begin with upper case letters. Notice too, that the margins are 1 on all sides, there are no page breaks, and the right margin is justified. Deviating from the standard APA format, the text in the abstract is single-spaced, with an extra line space between each title and text. Paragraphs are indented 5 spaces or _ and no extra line spaces are inserted between paragraphs. Unlike the APA format, the IDEC abstract submissions must be formally divided into three sections. The first section of the abstract briefly summarizes the purpose of the paper, introduces the specific problem or issue, and identifies the research question, issue, theory, or work to be analyzed. This section should contain a minimum of 50 words. Methodology or Process/Context This section of the abstract describes data collection processes or framework for analysis as well as the analysis of the data, development of an idea or theory. The format is consistent with the first section, in margins, font, paragraph style, and title style. Use of sub-headings Occasionally, it is helpful to the reader to organize the text in this section by use of subheadings. Sub-heading titles are separated from the previous paragraph by an extra line space, but no line space is left between the sub-heading and the text of that paragraph. The sub-heading title is positioned flush left, italicized, and important words begin with uppercase letters. Summary of Results or Summary The Summary identifies issues, significant findings or results, and the implications of the findings. A good abstract is accurate, self-contained, concise and specific (American Psychological Association [APA], 2001) and contains 500 words or less, not including references or titles. References American Psychological Association (2001). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. 5 th Edition. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. (See other examples of references at end of narrative section.)

Narrative Content and Format (Title is centered, 12 pt., important words begin in upper case) Statement of Purpose or Purpose Purpose or Issue is the title of the first section of the abstract. Notice that the title of the abstract and the section title are centered on the page, italicized, use 12 pt. Times New Roman font, and important word begin with upper case letters. Notice too, that the margins are 1 on all sides and the text in the abstract is single-spaced with an extra line space between each title and text. Paragraphs are indented 5 spaces or _ ; no extra line spaces are inserted between paragraphs, and page breaks are inserted only between the narrative itself and the Reference section. The formal divisions for the narrative may include as many as six sections. The first section introduces the specific problem, research question, issue, topic, theory or work to be analyzed. It includes the rationale, significance, or importance of the topic; outlines the goals and objectives of the work, and identifies an innovative approach or significance unique to the work. Theory or Context or Framework This section of the narrative describes context, background, precedents or scope of work, develops essential topics and presents environment or thinking and effects on the issue or topic. It may include opinions and perspectives of other scholars and experts; it states the relationship to interior design and/or interior design education. The format is consistent with the first section for margins, font, paragraph style, and title style. Review of Literature The review of literature presents history or past relevant work as related to the topic. It may investigate complexities within the topic, and usually presents alternative

viewpoints or refines the arguments. The format of the Review of Literature is consistent with the first two sections of the narrative. Occasionally, there is reason to use subheadings in these sections, but it is less common here than in the Process or Results sections. Process or Methodology This section describes the methodology use or research design, it may trace the development of an idea or theory, or present the framework for analyses. In both this section and the next one, Results, authors are strongly encouraged to include illustrations and addenda showing appropriate graphics. Up to five (5) illustrations, charts, drawings, or photos can be included to further clarify the reviewer s understanding of the content. The supplementary graphics must be referenced in the narrative, each must be submitted on appropriately labeled separate sheets of 8 _ x 11 paper, and must be stapled behind the narrative. Graphics (of any kind) will not be returned. Results or Findings or Discussion The Results section of the narrative conveys what was found, discovered, uncovered, or learned. It may question the accuracy, precisions, relevance, or completeness of topic. Additionally, this section could examine trends, recurrences, consequences, cause/effect relationships, scrutinize accepted facts, and acknowledge assumptions, inferences, correlations, relationships or analogies. It may also compare and contrast similarities and differences, merits, faults, or generalizations. Summary or Conclusions The summary evaluates process or methodology; outline implications, conclusions, consequences; and suggest further investigation, examinations, or research. The narrative should be no more than 1500 words (not including titles or references).

References (These are hypothetical references taken directly from the APA Publication Manual, 5th Edition,. In actual practice, only those references cited in the text of the narrative would be included. All references use a hanging indent of _ and are not justified on the right margin, They are single-spaced within the reference, a single line space is allowed between entries, arranged alphabetically by surnames, and chronologically within the same author with the earliest publication date first. For more detailed information go to http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/research/r_apa.html.) Baker, F. M. & Lightfoot, O. B. (1993). Psychiatric care of ethnic elders. In A. C. Gaw (Ed.). Culture, ethnicity, and mental illness (pp. 517-552). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press. Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204-232. Etd, M., & Langeheine, R. (1999). The measurement of consistency and occasional specificity with latent class models: A new model and its application to the measurement of affect. Psychological Methods, 4, 100-116. Retrieved November 19, 2000 from the PsycARTICLES database. Kandel, E. R., & Aquire, L. R. (2000, November 10), Neuroscience: Breaking down scientific barriers to the study of brain and mind. Science, 290, 1113-1120. O Neil, J. M., & Egan, J. (1992). Men s and women s gender role journeys: Metaphor for healing, transition, and transformation. In B. R. Wainrib (Ed.), Gender issues across the life cycle (pp. 107-123). New York: Springer. Saxe, G. B. (1991). Cultural and cognitive development: Studies in mathematical understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Zuckerman, M., Kieffer, S. C. in press). Race differences in face-ism: Does facial prominence imply dominance? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

Billboard Session WHAT IS IT? FORMAT CONTENT Each accepted paper or panel presenter is required to participate in a preview session to be held on the day of the scheduled presentation. The purpose of the Billboard Session is to market and preview presentations. Outside dimensions of the billboard poster are to be 24 x 36 in a vertical (portrait) format. Professional level graphics and text must be displayed. Presenters will tack up the billboards on large vertical display boards early on the morning of the scheduled paper or panel presentation. Presenters will not be required to bring their own easels. Each preview billboard is required to include the following information: 1. Title of presentation 2. Author s name and institution 3. Day and time of presentation 4. Graphics and text to allow the viewer to preview the presentation. 5. Handouts available for general distribution may be tacked to the display board.

POSTER CONTENT AND FORMAT CONTENT FORMAT Each preview poster is required to include the following information: 1. Title of presentation 2. Author s name(s) and institution(s) 3. Graphics and text to allow the viewer to fully understand the presentation. 4. Handouts available for general distribution may be tacked to the display board. Outside dimensions of the poster are to be no larger than 30 x 60 in a horizontal (landscape) format. Professional level graphics and text must be displayed. Presenters will tack up their posters on large vertical display boards early on the morning of the scheduled presentation and need to be present during the poster session later that day.. Presenters augmenting their poster with electronic media, must supply their own equipment.

Paper/Panel/Poster Review Score Sheet All submissions responding to the Call for Abstracts will be evaluated in a double-blind manner using identical score sheets, thus encouraging a even-handed, scholarly, professional approach to the review process. The questions included under each category below are examples that have been provided to prompt the author and reviewer into considering the quality of submissions. All questions may not be relevant to every submission. An example of the score sheet used is shown below. Submission TITLE: Number: STRUCTURE OF SUBMISSION Does the submission follow the format outlined in the Call for Abstracts? Is the appropriate information included under each heading? Is the writing style understandable and professional? Are visual examples included and are they well structured and articulated? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + SIGNIFICANCE Does the research/scholarly investigation create meaning and/or relationships important TO THE FIELD to current issues in interior design? Is there a fundamental seriousness to the investigation? Are relevant questions posed? Was important knowledge or research used in the development of the work? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + SCHOLARLY CONTENT Does this submission advance the body of knowledge? Are accepted methods of investigation, exploration, or process used? Does the methodology relate to the hypothesis or thesis? Are implications, consequences and conclusions discussed in context? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + INNOVATION Is research/scholarship investigated with ingenuity, originality, and/or creative processes and outcomes? Are new perspectives or approached presented? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + DEPTH and/or Is refinement and/or development of essential topics, processes, or ideas demonstrated?

BREADTH: Are complexities, difficulties, and/or issues explored from alternative perspectives? Is the quality of supporting data/evidence examined? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + CLARITY Has the problem, question, topic or issue been clearly identified and summarized? Are the thoughts organized? Is the use of language understandable? Are transitions used appropriately? Are the written and visual portions clear and well communicated? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + REASONING and/or LOGIC Does the visual evidence have a clear and logical relationship with the written information? Is the research/scholarly investigation display a clear organization or methodology? Has the author or panelist identified his/her position, drawing support from research, experience, or reflective practice? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + OTHER Are there other considerations that should be taken into account that impact the potential for presentation? OVERALL EVALUATION - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + SCORING 10.0-8.6: Excellent (Highly acceptable for presentation with SCALE exceptional attributes) 8.5-7.1: Above Average (Average acceptable for presentation with strong attributes) 7.0 5.0: Average (Minimally acceptable for presentation) Below 5.0: Unacceptable for presentation SCORE