You must enable JavaScript to view this website.

NASPSPA - North American Society for Psychology of Sport and Physical Activity

North American Society for Psychology of Sport and Physical Activity.

Outstanding Student Paper Awards

NASPSPA Outstanding Student Paper Award

*Updated Criteria for 2024 Conference

Purposes

  1. To recognize meritorious research by student members of NASPSPA.
  2. To foster research by student members of NASPSPA.

Eligibility

  • At the time of the award application, the applicant must be a currently enrolled student (not post-doctoral fellow) and a member of NASPSPA. The student may have graduated by the time of receiving the award but should be an enrolled student at the time of application.
  • Students may submit for the award more than once and are eligible to receive the award more than once.
  • The application for this award must be made by a single student (i.e., not a group of students), and describe research that was primarily conducted by that student, even though there may be co-authors who are also listed on presentations or publications resulting from this research.
  • The student must have selected the Outstanding Student Paper checkbox during the abstract submission.

Nature of the Award

Successful student authors of the Outstanding Student Paper will receive a certificate of award, the registration fee for the NASPSPA conference will be waived, and they will receive a $200 honorarium. The honorarium will be paid at the time of the annual conference by the secretary/treasurer either by check or PayPal. An award may be given in each of the three conference program areas, but the research should be of very high quality so three awards may not be given each year. Student winners will be acknowledged at the conference Business and Awards meeting.

Method of Selection

  1. The selection committee for a given program area consists of at least two of the Area Program Committee members. The Area Program Chair coordinates the review of applications and, if necessary, breaks ties.
  2. The Area Program Chair distributes award applications to the selection committee. Selection committee members independently evaluate which, if any, applications are sufficiently meritorious in meeting the award criteria to warrant recognition. Selection committee members then each rank the proposals that meet this threshold and submit rankings to the Area Program Chair. Committee members do not rank applications if there is a conflict of interest (e.g., current or former advisees) and inform the Area Program Chair accordingly. The Area Program Chair assembles the rankings and if necessary initiates a discussion among selection committee members to settle upon the top ranked application. The Area Program Chair will communicate the outcome of the decision-making process to the Past President and Executive Director and provide feedback to all applicants who did not receive the award. The Past President and Area Program Chair will jointly inform the winner of the Outstanding Student Paper Award (see template letter). Once notified, the winner will be asked to provide the names of their advisor, department chair, dean and provost (or equivalent administrators) and the Past President and Area Program Chair will send a letter recognizing their student’s award (see template letter).
  3. Students applying for the Outstanding Student Paper Award must:
    • Submit a short abstract through the web portal by the conference abstract submission deadline. During the process of submitting the abstract for the conference, the student also needs to answer “yes” to the question of whether they are applying for the Outstanding Student Paper Award in the web portal.
    • Two weeks following the abstract submission deadline student applicants must email a long abstract (no longer than 5 pages double-spaced, 12-pt. font, including figures, but excluding title page and references) in a single PDF file to the Past President and Area Program Chair. This abstract should include: 1) a brief introduction highlighting the significance of the study; 2) the research question(s);  3) methods; 4) results (including selected figures if appropriate); and 5) a discussion of the findings and their significance to the literature and/or theory, and/or professional practice, and/or policy. Deadline is two weeks following the abstract submission deadline of the Annual Conference. Name the file “last name_program area (MD/MLC/SEP)_StudentPaperAward. For example, “Smith_MD_Student PaperAward”.

A letter of nomination for the award must be written by the graduate student’s advisor indicating why this student’s research is worthy of the Outstanding Student Paper Award. This letter should: 1) indicate that the applicant is a current student; 2) highlight why this student’s research is worthy of the Outstanding Student Paper Award; 3) address the award criteria; 4) provide a statement that the student had human ethics approval for the study; and 5) include a statement indicating that the majority of the work undertaken for this research was completed by the student. In the case of multi-authored publications, the advisor should indicate the individual contributions of each author and specifically the unique contribution of the student. This letter must be emailed directly to the Past President and Area Program Chair by the advisor. Deadline is two weeks following the abstract submission deadline of the Annual Conference.

Criteria for selection

  1. The study is innovative adding knew knowledge to the field, methods are rigorous, the findings provide new insights, and the study has impact and implications to the literature/theory/professional practice/policy.
  2. The researcher observed appropriate standards for the treatment of participants. That is, a statement certifying that ethical treatment of participants was followed in conducting this research should be included.
  3. At the time of the award application, the applicant is a currently enrolled student (not post-doctoral fellow) and a member of NASPSPA.
  4. Supervisor letter has been submitted attesting to the research being the applicant’s primary work.
  5. Submissions will be evaluated on the above criteria using the following rubric:

Evaluate each criteria from (1) poor to (5) excellent.

  1. Innovation of the study and research questions – have the main findings or applications been published previously? Research questions, results and interpretations add new knowledge to science in the respective field.
  2. Rigor of methods – is the experimental design sound and appropriate for the stated purpose of the study? Are the methods and analysis appropriate and sufficiently clear to be readily repeated by other scientists? Methods are rigorous and follow best practices for science in the respective field.
  3. Significance of findings – does the paper report important findings that add to the body of scientific knowledge? Study results provide new insights and fill gaps in the literature for science in the respective field.
  4. Impact – are the theoretical, practical, or policy applications of the study clear and concise? Study provides insights that inform application of results.

 

 

Submission

 Rate each criteria 1 to 5  

Ethical Standards

  

Supervisor Letter

  

Feedback
Innovation

of Study

 Rigor of Methods Significance of Findings Impact
A         Yes/No Yes/No  
B         Yes/No Yes/No  
C         Yes/No Yes/No