Call for Papers Mistakes to Avoid for Academic Events

Have you ever received a call for papers(CFP) and felt unsure what to send? Lots of authors feel that way. Some teams overload their call for papers with extra details; others create CFPs that don’t include enough details. Many leave out key dates for the event or fail to state its primary purpose clearly. These small mistakes reduce trust and lead to fewer submissions, even when the event itself is solid.

A good call for papers focuses on clarity. Authors look for direct answers: What is the goal of the event? Who should submit? How does the process work? Where does their work fit into the event’s plan? How do the submission guidelines work? When these points are easily understandable, authors will gain clarity on what to submit, how to prepare, and shape their work to match the event.

This blog explains the common mistakes you should avoid when writing your call for papers. Each mistake is simple to fix, and each correction helps your event attract stronger abstract submissions. 

What Does “Call for Papers” Mean?

A call for papers provides authors with an understanding of what the event expects of them. It outlines the event’s main goals and explains the type of work the team wants. 

When the CFP is clearly defined, the author can decide whether their research meets the event’s criteria. They can also use it to determine whether the deadlines, themes, and review process meet their requirements. The clearer the message, the easier it becomes for researchers to prepare strong submissions. 

A well-written CFP also allows organizers to reach more people, as it is easy to read and share. With both parties having a clear understanding of the abstract submission process, the abstract submission flow remains smooth, and the quality of the research presented at the event is boosted.

A clear CFP usually covers:

• • Main theme and focus of the event
  • Who the event is built for
  • How authors must prepare their files
  • Word and page limits
  • Format rules and style needs
  • Deadlines for each stage
  • How the review will work
  • What happens after acceptance
  • Contact details for support

1. Vague Submission Guidelines

Many CFPs fail because the submission rules are vague. Guesswork slows down an author because they feel unsure if their file will match what the team expects. When the details stay vague, they worry their paper will not meet the event’s expectations. Therefore, authors are unsure about the length of the submission, the required format, and the submission deadline.

The lack of details can lead to a dip in submissions. In some cases, authors may skip an event altogether if the potential risk seems too great. Studies on academic writing behavior show that clear rules help authors feel sure about sending their work and reduce their fear of rejection.

Events with unclear submission guidelines lose strong work because people do not want to waste time on a submission that might not meet hidden rules. A call for papers that states each step openly earns wider reach and stronger trust.

Here is how you guide authors with confidence:

• • Use one simple structure for all rules.
  • Share the exact format details, including word limit, style, and layout.
  • State the review timeline in a direct way.
  • Add a brief point confirming who can submit.
  • Give authors one support page with a few examples that match the expected style.

2.  Missing the Deadlines

Oftentimes, an author expects certainty to schedule their time and effort so they can stay organized. Clear deadlines help authors schedule group reviews, writing sessions, travel plans, and budget needs with no confusion.

When a call for papers does not state deadlines directly, authors will delay submitting their work. Research groups often work with strict internal timelines. Departments require firm dates to budget for travel, organize peer reviews, and allocate resources in advance. Missing or unclear dates interrupt that flow.

On top of that, first-time researchers rely heavily on firm deadlines to stay on track and produce quality work. They may avoid events that make planning difficult.

What you should do to ensure researchers don’t miss deadlines: 

• • List all key dates in one place.
  • State the submission deadline clearly.
  • Add the review period and decision date.
  • Share the final paper deadline if the event uses one.
  • Add a small reminder on the event page that dates will not shift.

3. Unclear Review Criteria

Many call for papers fall short because the review criteria are not outlined clearly. Authors want to know how their work will be reviewed before they commit time to writing. They rely on simple signals that show what the reviewers value the most. When those signals are missing, authors send fewer submissions. Some might even skip the event because they fear their work will not match the hidden expectations.

Events with unclear review criteria can also risk uneven evaluations. Reviewers may judge abstracts using their own set of criteria, which can confuse authors when they receive feedback. Clear review criteria, with no doubt, can help authors, support reviewers, and improve the overall quality of accepted work.

Here is how you set fair and transparent review expectations:

• • Share the exact points reviewers will evaluate.
  • Break each point into simple language that matches your field.
  • State whether you value novelty, practical use, or strong data.
  • Tell authors if writing quality affects the score.
  • Provide one sample abstract that matches the event’s standard.

4. Weak Event Theme Explanation

Before writing, authors prefer a theme that gives them a clear objective and amplifies their writing and research. When the theme is hard to figure out, authors cannot see how their work relates to the event.

An unclear theme also undermines the event’s credibility. Authors may consider the event to lack a clear focus and therefore believe the review committee will randomly assign papers based on unclear criteria rather than the stated theme. When the theme is defined, authors can quickly see what the organizers care about and what questions they should explore to add value.

In addition, clearly defined themes benefit reviewers, as everyone reviews the same type of message, which keeps the process steady and fair.

To present a theme clearly and with impact:

• • Add one short line that explains the event’s main idea.
  • Add a few focus areas that support the line.
  • Show how the theme links to current issues in the field.
  • State what type of research the event hopes to highlight.
  • Add one example that shows the scope without limiting creativity. 

5. No Word Count or Format Rules

A missing word limit forces authors to write their paper without a boundary. Therefore, some end up writing long drafts that take hours to review, while others keep it short, hoping the event accepts it. As a result, reviewers have to put in different levels of effort, as each abstract comes in a different length or format.

Some authors write using block text while others adhere to strict academic standards. A few may place tables or figures in unusual spots. Reviewers then have to spend more time understanding the layout than focusing on the core ideas.

Rules that make the process steady:

• • Set a clear word range
  • Define layout needs
  • State what sections must appear
  • Give a sample file for reference

6. Lack of Contact Information

Many authors have difficulty trusting the CFP process when they are unable to find an appropriate person for help when needed. They often choose to look for clarification on specific issues or want to confirm something. If there isn’t a contact point listed in the CFP, they just take an educated guess. Guesswork results in errors. It may also discourage some authors from participating in the event.

Missing contact details creates stress for reviewers as well. Reviewers receive papers with avoidable mistakes because authors did not know who to ask. In turn, the review team now deals with slower work and more mix-ups. 

How to offer a simple contact point:

• • Add one visible email address on the CFP page.
  • Place a short help link near the submission rules.
  • Provide a single point of contact for technical issues.
  • Include one line that explains who handles queries.

7. Overly Complex Language

Authors do not want to decode long phrases or heavy academic terms before they even start writing. Complex wording slows them down and creates doubt about what the event expects. Some authors may misunderstand the rules and send papers in the wrong style. Others may skip the event because the CFP feels too difficult to follow. 

However, simple, everyday language helps authors quickly understand what the event wants from their submission. The clarity of the CFP will also eliminate questions for the organizer, allowing authors to focus on submitting strong work rather than spending additional time seeking clarification.

Here is how you keep your language simple and direct:

• • Write in short sentences that explain one idea at a time.
  • Choose standard terms that everyone can understand.
  • Replace long phrases with short and clear wording.
  • Remove extra adjectives that do not add value.
  • Add brief examples only when needed.
  • Review the full CFP once to check for heavy or unclear terms.

Final Thoughts

A strong call for papers depends on clear rules, simple writing, and steady guidance at every step. Authors will be much more confident when they know what you expect, how submissions are reviewed, and who to contact if they have questions along the way. Each detail shapes how many authors submit, how they prepare their manuscripts, and ultimately their perception of your event. If an event removes ambiguity from the process, the entire submission flow will become seamless for all parties involved.

Dryfta offers tools that help teams manage submissions in one place and organize event tasks through a unified dashboard. The features support a smoother call for papers process by keeping details structured and easy to review. With Dryfta, you can maintain transparency throughout the process so that your call for papers is easily seen and understood by those interested in participating in your event.