next »

[cranefly]

I have the choice of submitting either a poster session proposal or a paper lecture for a forthcoming conference.
I've done plenty of paper lectures, but never a poster session.
What are the advantages/disadvantages when comparing these? Can anybody with poster session experience please enlighten me as to how it went, what succeeded/what failed?
thanks!@

[sciencephd]

You don't say what field you are in.  You also don't say whether you are a good speaker.  In the sciences, I would never give a poster unless absolutely necessary.  It is more work, and you get much less attention, regardless of the size of the conference.

[dr_stones]

You can play cribbage at the poster session; hard to do when presenting a paper on a panel.

Posters are like sitting at the kiddie table at Thanksgiving.

[koda_kube]

Agree totally with sciencephd and Dr Stones.  I will always give an oral presentation (science). I insist that my PhD students give/request oral presentations, I will let my MS students give posters

[infopri]

I like attending poster sessions, but I would never, ever give one.  I agree with dr_stones about the kiddie table.

[polly_mer]

Well, at least at the conferences that I attend, the poster session isn't regarded as the kiddie table in a negative sense.  It's messy and noisy with much looser rules, particularly regarding time limits, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.  Poster sessions are fun and are great opportunities to have discussions and network.  Of course, the conferences that I'm thinking of have a variety of posters with even very senior people giving posters on new research simply because they don't want to cram all their new stuff into the short contributed talk timeslots.  Therefore, giving a poster is not considered being too immature to give a real talk, but is seen as a choice of a different presentation method.

The big drawback to choosing the poster session is audience size.  A talk in a respectable session has an audience of seventy-five with a substantial number of senior people.  A really exciting poster will have twenty people stop by in two hours.  So I often make the trade-off of "A lot of time with a few people so we can really discuss" or "A very short time presenting to a lot of people as an advertisement for the forthcoming paper".

I think the question that you need to ask yourself, Cranefly, is: "What do I want to accomplish at this conference?"  Do you need to make yourself visible to a bigger audience or is the possibility of discussions with interested people who aren't already in your colleague list intriguing?

[koda_kube]

I think the question that you need to ask yourself, Cranefly, is: "What do I want to accomplish at this conference?"  Do you need to make yourself visible to a bigger audience or is the possibility of discussions with interested people who aren't already in your colleague list intriguing?

Well put polly mer!

[wanderer]

I've done a poster session at an annual conference, and it helped connect me to two or three of the main scholars in the field.  I think poster sessions should only be for highly visual topics.

Part of the problem with these sessions, I feel, is that they are often poorly organized and administered.  Ideally, they should be in a venue where they can serve as a gallery during downtime. 

If you do decide to do the poster session, my advice is to arrive early, do a strong demonstration, and leave contact information.  I made a one page summary of my project. 

[magistra]

It depends very much on your field and on the set-up at this particular conference.  It also depends on whether your subject lends itself to a poster.  It can also be difficult and expensive to make one, I'm told, so you might want to find out more about that.  But if you've given several papers already, I'd think you're in a good position to try it.

There was a big thread on this maybe six months or so ago; you should try a search.

[galactic_hedgehog]

I'm in the sciences.  I sometimes prefer giving posters to giving talks.  They each have advantages.  The main pro of a poster is that you get to talk in much more depth about your topic with people who are truly interested in it.  That can't be done during a talk.  Sometimes during a talk, no questions are asked because of time constraints (you've run over, or someone prior to you has).  Those who are interested in your topic will stop by.  Some will start by asking you questions.  If they don't, ask if they'd like "a tour."  You can go into much more detail on specific points of your research, you can give them a (p)reprint, you can give them a mini version of you poster to take away.  You can interact with the presenters around you, if you choose.  I have often seen fairly sizable groups, with well-known, senior researchers, gathering around someone's poster, all of them discussing this and that about the topic.

The kiddie table can be lots more fun than sitting with the boring grown-ups.

[cranefly]

Thanks for the replies.
This is for a science-based conference, but I'm in the Humanities and this would be my first "sciencey-techy" conference.
I'm leaning towards poster since I've never been to this organization's conference before and not sure how it all works. A poster seems easier to handle, although I'm not sure I can sway others to my ideas without my charismatic presentations (that's a joke).
I'm an OK speaker, though, I think.
Galactic I particularly appreciate your point of view.
How are poster sessions entered on the CV, and how are they viewed in terms of T & P committees in your places of employment?

[collegekidsmom]

I like poster sessions because I like to talk about research in an informal setting. Even if one great conversation comes from it, it's worth it. Also, descriptions of poster sessions can end up on the web, attracting more people(such as editors interested in asking you to write a paper).
The last time I did a poster presentation, the organization stipulated that the poster had to be three feet by 8 feet, and put up on a board that size. It was very difficult for me to figure out how to make and print a poster that size. Many people took the handouts I prepared and some sent me follow-up comments.

[sciencephd]

It's worth noting that you also get informal conversations out of formal talks.  They just occur at a later time, like during the cocktails. 

[king_ghidorah]

I've always wished the humanities would go towards "postering" or something to this effect - I'm not sure exactly how it would work, but I've always thought conference papers in the humanities were largely incomprehensible when read aloud, despite the people who pretend they know what's going on.  Then there are the actual panels themselves in which people are so wound up there is gastric distress for months afterward.  And the Q&A is generally pointless and show-offy and nerve-wracking.  Plus somehow the panels I am honestly interested in always seem to be scheduled at the same damn time and I have to chose between them.  Very frustrating. 

[shrek]

I like and actually prefer poster sessions. In my health sciences field, there is a practioner side as well as a research side. The talks at the annual conference are generally limited and divided between the two kinds of goals (did I say there were more practioners than researchers?). Anyway, the talks can be very very good or very very bad-- but, it's hard to walk out of it and then pick up on a good one down the hall. The posters also tend to be uneven in this way. BUT, the advantage is that there are 100 other posters I can see.

From the presenter perspective, the format of a poster (background, methods, results, discussion) lend themselves very well to writing up the paper. So, I can get some nice in depth feedback on my poster, talk to some of the big names as well as the up and comers in an informal setting, and be a step closer to writing up a submitted data-based paper. The presentation doesn't do that, but what it does do is expose my stuff to a bigger audience-- which is nice too. I encourage my students to do posters (and to write them up quickly). Through these they have had a chance to talk with many of the leaders in research in their area. And that's also a nice benefit.

Advice for the poster: graphs are better than words. Be ready to give a 3-minute mini talk on the findings. A 1 page handout is nice. Make sure it can be read from far away (not too many words on any one page). Make sure it's understandable without the mini-talk. Be open to input (I had a student argue with one of the big names in our field that what this person had done was simply not relevent to the presented poster-- probably that was correct, but the right question was to say yes, you're right, can you send me that paper-- and then follow up with an e-mail).