Electronic Poster Judging Software for Conferences

When judges are balancing a full conference schedule, even small complications can slow down a poster session. Unclear assignments, inconsistent scoring instructions, and missing evaluations can leave organizers chasing forms instead of preparing results. Electronic poster judging software can bring assignments, rubrics, scores, and reviewer comments into a more organized digital workflow. But software alone won’t make judging fair or efficient. Organizers still need clear criteria, thoughtful reviewer assignments, and a plan for technical questions. If you’re comparing tools for a university, hospital, research institute, or professional society, start by understanding what the systems can manage and what your team must prepare.

Key Takeaways

• Define your judging workflow first: Set the event format, poster and judge counts, scoring criteria, assignments, and award rules before comparing tools.
• Test the experience for judges and organizers: Check device access, clear instructions, progress tracking, score review, accessibility, and support for connectivity issues.
• Compare the full service, not just software features: Confirm pricing, training, reporting, event-day support, and how judging works with poster content and conference logistics.

What Is Electronic Poster Judging Software?

Electronic poster judging software helps conference organizers collect, organize, and review evaluations of research posters. It can bring key parts of the judging process into one digital workflow, including reviewer assignments, scoring criteria, ratings, and comments. Instead of distributing paper ballots and tallying every score by hand, organizers can use the system to gather evaluations and check their progress.

The right setup depends on the event. Judges might review posters before the conference, score them during an in-person session, or evaluate them remotely. Some tools let reviewers use a browser on their own device, while others use QR codes to make scoring quick to access. Organizers can choose a process that fits the schedule, the number of posters, and the way judges will take part.

Judging software may stand alone or work alongside other conference services. For events that need digital poster displays, submission management, or on-site support as well as scoring, it helps to consider how judging fits into the broader session. ePosterBoards provides ePoster management services for organizers coordinating digital poster content and sessions.

How digital poster judging works

Organizers begin by setting up the judging process, including the posters to review, the judges, and the criteria or rating scale. Reviewers then access their assignments and submit scores, often with comments. Depending on the tool, they may sign in through a browser or scan a code to open the rating form on a personal device.

For example, InstaJudge is described as a paperless, app-less tool that lets judges scan a code and leave a rating. This can make it easier for reviewers to submit feedback without collecting or returning paper forms. Before the event, organizers should test the steps judges will follow and share clear instructions on how to access and complete each evaluation.

What it manages before, during, and after judging

Before judging begins, software can help organize poster assignments, reviewer access, and scoring criteria. A browser-based tool such as ePostersReview allows reviewers to see their assigned posters and check their review progress when they sign in. This gives judges a clear view of their workload and helps organizers prepare the evaluation process.

During the session, the system collects ratings and comments and may show which evaluations are complete. Afterward, organizers can review and tally results to help inform award decisions. Features vary by provider, so check whether the software includes progress tracking, exports, or reports, and how it flags missing evaluations. Confirming these details in advance helps the team plan the final review.

How digital scoring differs from paper scoring

Paper judging often involves printing forms, distributing them, collecting completed ballots, and entering scores manually. Digital scoring moves those steps into an online workflow. Judges submit ratings electronically, and organizers can review progress and results in one place. With some tools, reviewers can enter scores from their seats using a phone or another personal device, rather than handing in a form.

Digital scoring can also help organizers apply consistent criteria and spot incomplete evaluations before results are finalized. It still requires thoughtful preparation: judges need clear instructions, an accessible way to submit scores, and support if they have trouble. Organizers should also confirm that the process works with the venue’s connectivity and the devices judges plan to use.

How Does Electronic Poster Judging Work?

Electronic poster judging uses digital tools to organize the review process, from assigning posters to judges through collecting scores and preparing results. Instead of distributing paper forms and entering scores by hand, organizers set up the judging criteria and assignments in a platform. Judges then access their assigned posters and submit evaluations digitally.

The exact process depends on the event. Judges may review posters in person using personal devices or event workstations, or evaluate them online through a virtual platform. Organizers can monitor submitted evaluations and follow up on missing scores before tallying results. It helps to decide in advance who will manage assignments, answer judge questions, and approve the final results.

Judging also needs to fit into the wider event plan. Poster content, display setup, judging schedules, and technical support can all affect the experience. ePosterBoards offers electronic poster management as part of its conference services, helping organizers coordinate judging with poster content and event logistics.

Set up judges, assignments, criteria, and scoring scales

Begin by defining what judges should evaluate and how they should score each item. A rubric might cover research significance, methods, clarity, and presentation quality. Use clear descriptions for each criterion and scoring level so judges understand how to apply the scale consistently.

Next, assign judges to posters. Consider each judge’s subject expertise, workload, category coverage, and potential conflicts of interest. Some judging platforms help organizers manage assignments, criteria, and evaluations in one workflow. For example, online judging software can bring key evaluation tasks together, though features vary by provider. Before the session, test the rubric and assignments with a sample entry. This gives organizers a chance to clarify instructions and catch setup issues before judges begin.

Give judges access through personal devices, event workstations, or virtual platforms

Judges need a simple way to find their assigned posters and submit evaluations. At an in-person event, they might use a phone, tablet, or laptop, or complete reviews on workstations provided by the organizers. For virtual sessions, judges can access poster materials and scoring forms through an online platform.

Choose an approach that fits the venue, event format, and available internet connection. Tell judges how to sign in, what devices they can use, and where to get help. A browser-based tool may reduce setup steps, while event workstations can offer an alternative for judges who prefer not to use personal devices. Some systems let participants submit feedback without downloading an app, as described in ePostersLive’s judging tool overview. Test access ahead of time, especially when judges will move between rooms or rely on venue Wi-Fi.

Collect ratings and comments during evaluations

For each assigned poster, judges review the content, apply the rubric, and enter their ratings in a digital form. A comments field can capture the reasoning behind a score or provide feedback for presenters. Organizers should decide whether comments are required, optional, or reserved for the judging committee.

Keep the form focused and easy to complete. Criteria should be clearly worded, scoring options should be consistent, and judges should know how to save or submit their work. A short practice review can help judges get comfortable with the process before evaluations begin. It also gives organizers a chance to spot confusing instructions or form issues. Some browser-based tools show judges how many posters they have been assigned and let them check their review progress when they sign in, as described in the ePostersReview overview.

Track progress, flag incomplete evaluations, and review results before tallying

During the session, organizers can monitor which evaluations are complete and which still need attention. A progress view makes it easier to spot missing scores early, while there is still time to contact a judge or arrange another reviewer. It can also help confirm that judges have submitted all required evaluations before the session ends.

Before tallying results, check for incomplete forms, duplicate submissions, or scores that may need clarification. Follow the event’s judging rules when resolving issues, and confirm that the right people will review and approve the final results. Digital tools make submissions easier to track, but organizers still need to oversee the process. Decide in advance who will monitor progress, handle corrections, and authorize the final tally.

Which Poster Judging Challenges Can Software Solve?

A poster session may involve dozens or hundreds of submissions, several judging categories, and a team of reviewers working on a tight schedule. Coordinating that process with paper forms and spreadsheets can leave organizers juggling assignments, chasing missing scores, and entering results while also managing the event. Electronic judging software brings many of these tasks into a shared workflow, giving organizers and judges clearer steps to follow.

The benefits depend on choosing a system that matches your event’s rules. A useful platform can distribute assignments, provide a consistent rubric, collect ratings and comments, and show which evaluations are complete. It can also make results easier to review, but organizers still need to set clear criteria, manage conflicts of interest, and decide how ties or scoring questions will be handled.

For conferences that also need digital poster displays and session coordination, judging is one part of a larger event plan. Reviewing how scoring connects with content and logistics, such as through ePosterBoards’ conference services, can help organizers select a workflow that works for judges, presenters, and staff.

Reduce paperwork, manual entry, and scoring errors

Paper ballots require organizers to distribute forms, collect them, interpret handwriting, and transfer scores into a spreadsheet. Each step takes time and creates another chance for a score to be missed or entered incorrectly. Digital judging tools let reviewers submit scores through a browser or a code they scan with a personal device, reducing the need to handle and re-enter paper forms.

For example, InstaJudge’s paperless process lets participants scan a code and submit ratings from their seats without downloading an app. Before choosing a similar tool, confirm that its access method fits your judges and event setup. Organizers should also plan how to correct an accidental entry, handle connectivity problems, and verify scores before awards are announced.

Apply consistent criteria across judges and poster categories

A shared rubric helps judges understand what to assess and how to use the scoring scale. Without clear criteria, one reviewer may focus on research methods while another gives more weight to presentation. Software can display the same instructions and rating options to each judge, while allowing organizers to tailor criteria for different categories, such as clinical research, student projects, or technical demonstrations.

Check whether the platform supports the scales and rubrics your event requires. ePostersReview, for instance, supports several rating formats, including numerical and nominal scales. A digital rubric cannot eliminate differences in expert opinion, but it can make expectations clearer. Share criteria before judging begins, explain how to score each measure, and establish how the committee will handle ties or widely varying evaluations.

Organize assignments and limit conflicts or bias

When many judges and posters are involved, assignment tracking can quickly become difficult. Software can give organizers a central view of which reviewers are assigned to each poster and whether their evaluations are complete. This makes it easier to balance workloads, follow up on outstanding scores, and adjust assignments when a judge is unavailable.

A platform can also help organizers record and act on conflicts of interest, such as a reviewer evaluating a colleague’s work. Ask judges to disclose relevant relationships, then review those disclosures before assignments are finalized. The software can support this process, but organizers remain responsible for deciding whether a conflict requires reassignment. Some tools also simplify judge communications through email enrollment and reminders, as described in Evalato’s judging features.

Collect useful comments alongside ratings

A rating shows how a poster scored, but it may not explain the reviewer’s reasoning. Comments can help organizers understand different evaluations and give presenters specific feedback they can use in future work. Choose software that lets judges leave comments alongside ratings and gives organizers a straightforward way to review or export that feedback.

Some platforms also let reviewers flag or reject submissions and show them how many posters they have been assigned. ePostersReview’s browser-based workflow includes reviewer comments and assignment information. Before judging starts, tell judges what kind of feedback to provide and whether presenters will see it. If comments will be shared, ask for constructive, rubric-based observations and clarify whether reviewer names will be attached.

Coordinate judging and support timely award decisions

Organizers need to know more than the final scores. They also need to see which evaluations are complete, identify missing ratings, apply tie-breaking rules, and prepare results for committee review. A judging system can bring these steps together by showing progress and giving authorized staff access to submitted scores.

Some tools make results available as ratings arrive. InstaJudge’s results workflow allows organizers to view ratings and use them when selecting category winners. Confirm how a platform calculates totals, handles incomplete evaluations, and lets staff verify entries before results are finalized. Decide in advance who can view interim scores, when judging closes, and who approves awards. When coordinating scoring with digital poster content and session details, ePosterBoards’ ePoster management services can help organizers plan the broader conference workflow.

Which Electronic Poster Judging Features Matter Most?

Customize rubrics, rating scales, and award categories

Choose software that lets you shape the evaluation around your conference instead of making every poster fit the same template. A biomedical session might prioritize research methods and clinical relevance, while a technology showcase may focus on originality and practical value. Look for editable criteria, clear descriptions of each score, and options to weight criteria differently.

The system should also support separate award categories and rules, such as divisions for students, early-career researchers, or professionals. Settle the rubric with program leads before judging begins, then give judges concise instructions so they apply it consistently. Some platforms also help organizers enroll judges and send reminders. Evalato’s overview of online judging software describes features for managing judges and communications.

Simplify interfaces, device access, and judge onboarding

Judges may need to review several posters in a short period, so the scoring process should be easy to learn and use. Look for an interface that makes it simple to find assigned posters, review criteria, enter ratings, and save comments. A short guide or walkthrough can answer common questions before the session and limit confusion once judging is underway.

Check whether judges can use a phone, tablet, or laptop, and whether the event can provide workstations for people who need them. Ask if judges must download an app or create an account, then share those steps in advance. A tool featured by ePostersLive allows feedback without a download or leaving a seat. Its judging tool offers an example of a low-friction approach for live sessions.

Track progress, tally scores, and report results

Organizers need a clear view of judging status while evaluations are underway. A dashboard should show which assignments are complete, in progress, or not yet started, so staff can follow up before the session ends. Confirm that the software calculates totals according to your rubric, including weighted criteria, and ask how it handles ties or missing scores.

Before announcing awards, give designated staff a chance to review results for errors, such as a rating entered on the wrong scale. Clear reports and export options make it easier to share approved results with program leads and retain records for later review. Ask what information each report includes and whether you can control who sees scores and comments. A dependable review process can help maintain participant trust, a point emphasized in Evalato’s overview of judging software.

Manage assignments, comments, exports, and incomplete-score alerts

Look for tools that help organizers assign judges to the right posters, update assignments when schedules change, and account for conflicts of interest. Ask whether the system can record restrictions and flag problematic assignments before judging begins. Clear assignment controls save time and support a fair process.

Comments add context that scores alone cannot provide. Check whether judges can leave feedback with their ratings, and whether organizers can export both in a format that suits post-event review. Incomplete-score alerts and reminders can also help staff catch missing evaluations while there’s still time to resolve them. If judging is part of a broader digital poster workflow, confirm how it works with ePoster content and session management, including presenter materials and session details.

Ensure accessibility, privacy, and backup connectivity

Choose a judging interface that supports people with different access needs. Readable text, strong contrast, keyboard-friendly controls, and compatibility with assistive technology can make the process more usable. The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines provide a helpful reference when asking a provider about accessibility.

Ask how the platform protects judge and presenter information. Clarify who can view scores and comments, how access is managed, and how long records are kept. For an in-person event, test the system in the venue where judging will take place. Confirm whether scores save automatically, what happens during a network interruption, and what backup steps staff should follow. A clear plan for reconnecting and checking saved evaluations can prevent uncertainty during a busy session.

Provide training and responsive technical support

Schedule a test before conference day, even if the system seems straightforward. Ask the provider to walk organizers through rubric setup, judge assignments, reports, and award review. Then invite a few judges to try the process with sample posters. A short rehearsal can uncover confusing instructions or access problems while there’s still time to address them.

Find out what support is available during live judging, including whom judges and staff should contact and how to reach them. When displays, content management, and judging run together, coordinate support across the full session rather than treating each task separately. ePosterBoards offers event services that include planning and technical support. Discussing responsibilities and support arrangements in advance helps organizers prepare for event-day needs.

How Do Electronic Poster Judging Solutions Compare?

Use standalone tools for scoring, comments, and results

Standalone judging tools focus on collecting evaluations without requiring organizers to use a full conference platform. For example, InstaJudge gives judges a paperless, app-free way to submit ratings by scanning a code. This can work well when your event already has separate systems for poster submissions, displays, and session planning, but needs a straightforward way to gather scores.

Before selecting a tool, check whether it supports your criteria, scoring scales, comments, and result reports. Also consider how scores will reach the people making award decisions. If organizers need to transfer results between systems, confirm that the steps are simple and clear.

Choose event platforms with built-in judging

An event platform with built-in judging can bring evaluation together with other parts of a poster session. Organizers may find it easier to coordinate judging when the process sits alongside event tools, rather than relying on several separate systems. ePosterBoards offers electronic judging as part of its conference presentation services, along with display and event-management support.

Ask providers how judges access the scoring workflow and which features are included. Check that the platform can accommodate your award categories, evaluation criteria, and event format, whether your conference is in person or virtual. It’s also helpful to clarify what organizers can manage themselves and where the provider’s team steps in.

Connect judging, content, displays, and event support with integrated ePoster services

Integrated ePoster services connect judging with poster content, digital displays, and event logistics. This lets organizers plan evaluation as part of the wider poster experience, from preparing presenter files to running sessions. A connected approach can be especially helpful when a conference includes many posters, multiple judging categories, or both in-person and virtual participation.

When comparing services, ask how each stage works and who is responsible for it. Find out who helps prepare presenter files, supports judges, manages displays, and handles technical issues during the event. Clear responsibilities can help your team keep judging organized while presenters and attendees use the poster session.

See how ePosterBoards connects judging with conference setup and ePoster management

ePosterBoards combines electronic judging, voting, and evaluation tools with services for planning and managing poster sessions. Organizers can explore conference setup options for digital displays and session logistics, and ePoster session and content management for coordinating presenter content. The company also provides event services and technical support for in-person and virtual conferences.

When reviewing the fit for your event, ask how judges submit evaluations, how results are tallied, and what support is available during sessions. Connecting those steps with display planning and content management can help your team coordinate judging alongside the rest of the poster experience.

What Does Electronic Poster Judging Software Cost?

Electronic poster judging software does not have one standard price. The cost depends on the pricing model, the number of posters and judges, and how much support your event needs. A tool focused on ratings and comments may cost less than a service that also supports submissions, judge assignments, reporting, displays, and event-day coordination.

When comparing quotes, check what the price includes and what could add to it. Ask whether the fee covers all judges and submissions, multiple scoring rounds, customized criteria, reports, training, and support during the event. Some platforms charge extra as submission volume increases or when you add review stages or features. Judging software pricing models can range from per-event packages to charges based on submissions, reviews, or selected tools.

For conferences where judging is part of a larger ePoster program, consider whether you also need help with content, displays, or event logistics. Comparing those needs with ePosterBoards’ management services can help you define the scope of the support to include in your budget. A clear list of requirements makes it easier to compare providers on equal terms.

Compare flat-rate, per-poster, per-judge, and feature-based pricing

A flat-rate fee sets a price for a defined event or period, which can make budgeting straightforward. Confirm how many posters, judges, scoring rounds, and administrator accounts the rate includes. Per-poster pricing ties the cost to submission volume, while per-judge pricing may work well when the number of evaluators is predictable. Feature-based plans charge for specific capabilities, such as custom rubrics, analytics, or data exports.

Ask each provider how the price changes if your event grows. Check for minimum fees, volume thresholds, or additional charges for another review stage. Then compare quotes using the same poster count, judge count, and feature list. Evalato’s judging software pricing overview outlines several approaches, including event-based and volume-based pricing.

Factor in event size, format, setup, reporting, and support

Poster and judge counts matter, but they are not the only cost factors. In-person, virtual, and hybrid sessions may have different requirements for device access, connectivity, presenter assistance, and coordination with display areas. If you need help assigning judges, tracking completion, or preparing award reports, confirm whether that work is included.

Also consider how much setup your team can manage. A lower-cost scoring tool may require staff to organize submissions, help judges access the system, and compile results. A broader event service may include more coordination and live technical assistance. Ask providers to itemize what they supply, including integrations and onsite services. ePosterBoards’ conference setup services provide an example of the event logistics you may want to discuss.

Ask about packages, training, and extra fees

Request an itemized quote so you can see what each package covers. Ask whether configuration, rubric setup, judge onboarding, test sessions, and event-day support are included. Check for added fees related to branding, extra administrators, additional scoring rounds, data exports, or post-event assistance. These details help you compare the full service rather than just the advertised starting price.

Find out how the provider handles changes. If you receive more submissions than expected, replace a judge, or add an award category, ask whether the plan can be adjusted and what that will cost. Clarify whether training is live or self-guided, and when support is available during your event. Stripe’s guide to SaaS pricing models explains why pricing should reflect the services and resources a plan provides.

Compare total costs with the staff time and materials paper judging requires

For a useful comparison, estimate the full cost of running paper-based judging. Include printing forms, distributing them, collecting completed sheets, entering scores, checking calculations, and following up on missing evaluations. Add the staff time spent coordinating judges and preparing results. These tasks can take considerable effort when a session includes many posters or award categories.

Then compare that estimate with a software quote that covers the same workflow. Include setup, training, support, and reporting fees, and consider how much staff time the platform could save. Digital judging is not automatically the less expensive option; the best fit depends on your event’s size and needs. For context, Zealous notes that some robust awards management platforms may require annual budgets starting around $10,000. Use that figure as a prompt to ask whether a plan is designed for an event of your scale, rather than as a standard price for poster judging software.

What Can Reviews Tell You About Software Reliability?

Check feedback on ease of use, judge onboarding, and reporting

Reviews are most useful when they describe specific steps, not just whether someone liked the software. Look for comments about how easily judges signed in, found their assigned posters, entered scores, and left feedback. Clear instructions and a straightforward interface can help judges get started without lengthy training, especially when they have limited time.

Check what reviewers say about organizer reports, too. Could they monitor completed evaluations, spot missing scores, and review results without tracking everything by hand? Software testimonials can provide practical details about how a product works for its users. If reviews leave gaps, ask the provider to walk you through judge onboarding and reporting before you commit.

Prioritize reviews of academic and professional poster sessions

A platform used for a general awards program may not match the needs of a scientific or medical poster session. Give more weight to feedback from universities, hospitals, research institutes, and professional societies. These organizers can speak to workflows such as judging multiple poster categories, applying detailed rubrics, coordinating a large judge pool, and meeting award deadlines.

Compare each reviewer’s event size and format with your own. Was judging in person, virtual, or hybrid? Did judges use personal devices or event workstations? Reviews that answer these questions can help you assess whether the software fits your session. Ask providers for references or examples from similar events, and confirm that the described setup reflects the way you plan to run your judging.

Ask how providers handle event-day changes, technical issues, and incomplete scores

Look for reviews that explain what happened when a judge needed a new assignment, a device stopped working, or an evaluation was left unfinished. These situations can affect the accuracy and timing of results, so ask providers how organizers can make changes, flag missing scores, and check evaluations before awards are decided. A clear process helps maintain confidence in the results, a key part of any online judging workflow.

Ask whether judges’ work is saved if connectivity drops, and how organizers can identify and follow up on incomplete entries. Find out whether changes are recorded and who can review them. Specific examples from past events will tell you more than general claims about reliability.

Confirm support availability before and during the event

Even software that is easy to use can raise questions during setup or judging. Check whether reviews mention timely, helpful support, and ask who judges and organizers should contact if an issue comes up. Confirm which channels are available, when live assistance is offered, and whether it is included in the price.

Be specific about the help your event may need: configuring rubrics, preparing judges, checking scores, or responding to last-minute changes. If your conference also includes digital poster displays, ask how judging can fit with content and venue plans. ePosterBoards provides conference services that include event planning and technical support, giving organizers a point of reference when coordinating judging with the wider poster session.

How Do You Choose Software for Your Poster Session?

Start with the session you’re planning, not a long list of features. Consider your event format, the number of posters and judges, your scoring rules, and how the software will fit with poster displays and event support. A short list of practical requirements makes vendor comparisons more useful.

Match the solution to your event format, size, and judging rules

List the basics: How many posters will you display? How many judges will participate? Will evaluations take place in person, online, or in both settings? Then define the rules, including scoring criteria, award categories, deadlines, and any need for anonymous reviews or conflict-of-interest controls.

A small session with one award may need only simple scoring and comments. A large conference with several disciplines may require separate rubrics, judge assignments, progress tracking, and organized results. Ask providers how setup and pricing change with the number of posters, judges, or categories. Comparing the same requirements across vendors helps you see which features are essential and which you may not need. Clarify what’s included in the quoted price, such as configuration, training, and reporting.

Check workflows for organizers, judges, and presenters

Test the software from each user’s point of view. Organizers should be able to set criteria, assign judges, monitor evaluations, and review results without relying on manual workarounds. Judges need clear instructions, an easy way to find assigned posters, and a straightforward process for entering scores and comments. A consistent evaluation process can also help maintain participants’ confidence in the results, as Evalato explains.

Presenters need clear submission requirements and timely updates about what to prepare. Ask for a demonstration based on a realistic session, then see how the system handles late changes, incomplete scores, and questions during the event. Confirm who is responsible for each step so organizers, judges, and presenters know what to do and when.

Confirm device access and connectivity for in-person, virtual, or hybrid events

Ask which devices judges can use, whether they need to download an app, and what happens if Wi-Fi becomes unreliable. For an in-person session, check whether the software works on judges’ phones, tablets, or venue workstations, and whether you need to provide devices. For virtual or hybrid events, confirm how remote judges will view posters and submit evaluations.

Some digital poster formats can include slideshows and video, giving presenters additional ways to share their work, as Ex Ordo describes. Make sure the judging platform supports the content presenters will submit. Ask about backup connectivity, technical assistance, and how evaluations can continue if a device or network connection fails. Testing the setup before the event gives your team time to address access issues.

Coordinate judging with poster displays, content management, and on-site support

Judging is one part of the poster session. Consider how the software connects with submissions, display screens, presenter instructions, and award reporting. When these tasks rely on separate systems, organizers may need to transfer information by hand or resolve mismatched poster details. Ask how files are collected and checked, how posters are assigned to displays, and how judges access the correct content.

A provider that supports both judging and the broader ePoster workflow can help keep these pieces coordinated. ePosterBoards offers ePoster session and content management and conference setup services. Before you decide, clarify who will handle presenter file preparation, venue planning, live-session questions, and score review. Also confirm how organizers can reach technical support during the event.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can judges use their own phones to score posters?
Often, yes. Some systems work in a mobile browser or let judges scan a code to open a scoring form. Check whether judges need an account or app, and test the process on the devices they plan to use.

What should a poster judging rubric include?
Choose criteria that reflect your event’s goals, such as research quality, methods, originality, and clarity. Explain each criterion and scoring level so judges can apply the rubric consistently. Use separate rubrics when award categories call for different standards.

How can organizers handle missing evaluations or scoring disagreements?
Monitor completion while judging is underway and contact reviewers about missing entries before the deadline. Set rules in advance for ties, incomplete reviews, and score differences, then have designated staff check and approve results before announcing awards.

Is electronic poster judging software suitable for virtual and hybrid events?
It can be, but confirm how remote judges access poster content and submit evaluations, and how the process works for judges attending in person. Test device access and connectivity for each format, and decide what judges should do if a connection drops.

What should organizers compare when reviewing pricing?
Compare quotes using the same poster and judge counts, scoring requirements, and support needs. Ask whether setup, training, reports, extra judging rounds, and event-day assistance are included, and whether fees change if the event’s scope changes.