1. Scope and Submission Expectations
INDIS 2026 invites original, unpublished research contributions aligned with the conference themes in
design, innovation, and interdisciplinary studies.
Submissions must:
- Present novel contributions (theoretical, methodological, or applied)
- Demonstrate rigor in research design and analysis
- Clearly articulate relevance to design and innovation contexts
Submissions that are descriptive, speculative without grounding, or lacking methodological clarity will
not be considered.
2. Types of Submissions
Authors may submit under the following categories:
- Full Research Papers
- Case Study and Industry Papers
- Research through Design Contribution
- Posters / Short Paper
Each category must clearly state:
- Research objective
- Methodology
- Findings or expected contributions
3. Originality and Ethical Compliance
By submitting, authors confirm that:
- The work is original and not under review elsewhere
- All sources are properly cited
- The manuscript complies with INDIS 2026 Publication Ethics and Plagiarism Policies
All submissions will undergo plagiarism screening (iThenticate/Turnitin).
Failure to comply will result in immediate rejection.
4. Manuscript Preparation
4.1 Formatting
- Authors must follow the prescribed template (Link)
- Submissions must be in PDF format for review
4.2 Anonymization (Mandatory for Review)
To ensure double-blind review:
- Remove author names and affiliations
- Avoid self-identifying references (e.g., “in our previous work…”)
- Replace acknowledgements with “blinded for review”
Submissions violating anonymity may be desk-rejected.
5. Structure of the Paper
A typical submission should include:
- Title (clear and specific)
- Abstract (150–250 words)
- Keywords (4–6 terms)
- Introduction and research context
- Literature review / background
- Methodology
- Results / findings
- Discussion and implications
- Conclusion
- References
For design research:
- Include process documentation, artifacts, or evaluation frameworks where relevant
6. Submission Process
- All papers must be submitted through the official conference submission system
- Authors must select the appropriate track/theme
- Metadata (title, abstract, keywords) must be accurately entered
Incomplete submissions will not be considered.
7. Review Process Awareness
Authors should be aware that:
- All submissions undergo double-blind peer review
- Each paper is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers
- Evaluation is based on:
- Originality
- Methodological rigor
- Relevance
- Contribution
8. Revision and Acceptance
- Authors must submit a revised manuscript with a response to reviewers
- Failure to address reviewer comments adequately may result in rejection
9. Camera-Ready Submission
- Follow final formatting guidelines
- Pass plagiarism screening again
- Include author details and acknowledgements
- Submit within the deadline
Non-compliant papers will be excluded from proceedings.
10. Authorship and Contributions
- Only individuals with substantial intellectual contribution should be listed as authors
- All authors must approve the final submission
- Changes in authorship must be justified and approved
11. Conflict of Interest Declaration
- Financial or institutional affiliations must be disclosed
- Any relationships influencing research must be declared
12. Presentation Requirement
- At least one author must complete Registration
- Must present the paper in person
Failure to present may result in exclusion from proceedings.
13. Use of AI Tools
- Use of AI tools must be disclosed
- Authors remain responsible for accuracy and originality
Undisclosed use may be treated as misconduct.
INDIS 2026 – Reviewer Guidelines
1. Role of Reviewers
- Evaluate submissions objectively
- Ensure academic rigor and relevance
- Contributing to the overall quality of the conference proceedings
2. Review Model
INDIS 2026 follows a double-blind review process:
- Reviewer identities are hidden
- Author identities are hidden
Reviewers must not attempt to identify authors.
3. Confidentiality
Reviewers must:
- Treat submissions as confidential
- Not share, distribute, or use content for personal research
Uploading manuscripts to external AI tools or platforms is strictly prohibited
4. Conflict of Interest
Reviewers must decline review if:
- There is prior collaboration with authors
- There is institutional affiliation overlap
- There is any personal or competitive conflict
Failure to disclose conflicts compromises review integrity.
5. Evaluation Criteria
Core Criteria:
- Originality and novelty
- Methodological rigor
- Clarity of argument
- Relevance
- Contribution
For Design Research:
- Quality of design process
- Validity of evaluation
- Real-world relevance
6. Review Quality Expectations
Reviews must be:
- Constructive and specific
- Evidence-based
- Actionable
Unstructured or superficial reviews may be rejected by the Program Committee.
7. Review Structure
Reviewers should include:
- Summary of the paper
- Strengths
- Weaknesses
- Detailed comments
- Recommendation (Accept / Revise / Reject)
8. Ethical Responsibilities
Reviewers must not:
- Use unpublished data for personal gain
- Delay reviews intentionally
- Provide biased or discriminatory feedback
9. Use of AI Tools
Reviewers must not:
- Upload manuscripts to AI systems
- Generate reviews using AI tools without oversight
All reviews must reflect independent human judgment.
.png)
