Code of Conduct for Challenge, Special Session, Tutorial and Workshop Organisers

Organisers of challenges, special sessions, tutorials and workshops are entrusted with ensuring the integrity, inclusivity, and scientific value of the event. This Code of Conduct outlines the responsibilities and expected standards for organisers to foster fairness, transparency, and respect within the community.

(1) Professionalism and Respect

• Treat all participants, reviewers, and colleagues with courtesy, dignity, and respect.

• Avoid discriminatory or offensive behavior based on nationality, gender, ethnicity, religion, disability, sexual orientation, career stage, or any other personal characteristic.

• Use professional, appropriate and context-sensitive language in line with the field norms in all written and verbal communication, including emails, announcements, and public materials.

• Foster an environment where diverse perspectives and contributions are respected.

(2) Transparency and Fairness

• Define the scope, rules, timelines, and evaluation criteria of challenges and sessions clearly and publicly in advance.

• Ensure that all participants have equal access to required resources (datasets, baselines, evaluation platforms).

• Apply consistent, unbiased, and well-documented procedures for evaluating contributions and selecting accepted work.

• Ensure awards, rankings, or recognitions are based strictly on published evaluation criteria.

(3) Conflict of Interest Management

• Disclose personal or professional conflicts of interest to the Technical Program Committee in advance.

• Refrain from reviewing or making decisions on submissions where a conflict exists (e.g., involving current or recent collaborators, students, or affiliated institutions).

• Assign conflicted cases to neutral co-organisers or independent reviewers.

• Limit organiser-authored contributions to no more than two accepted papers per organizing individual in each of their special sessions, challenges or workshops, to ensure fairness and balanced representation.

(4) Scientific Integrity

• Adopt a double-blind review process for any papers or submissions reviewed under the organisers’ responsibility.

• Ensure that datasets, tools, and evaluation metrics provided are properly documented, credited, and ethically sourced.

• Respect intellectual property rights and require participants to do the same.

• Encourage reproducibility by providing baseline systems, open-source code (when feasible), and clear documentation.

• Avoid practices that artificially advantage certain groups of participants, such as selective release of data or hidden test conditions.

• Ensure GenAI use by session authors and reviewers is in line with ISCA guidelines for authors and reviewers, if applicable.

(5) Ethics in Data Use

Organisers have a heightened duty of care when challenges or sessions involve human subjects, vulnerable populations, or health-related data.

• Ethical Approval: Confirm that any data involving human subjects has received the necessary ethical review and approval (e.g., IRB/ethics committee).

• Informed Consent: Ensure that all data collection was performed with informed consent, and that participants understood how their data may be used.

• Privacy and Anonymisation: Protect participant privacy by anonymising datasets and following best practices for secure data handling. Personal identifiers must never be shared.

• Data from Diverse Groups: When using datasets representing underrepresented, minority, or sensitive populations, ensure that participation does not reinforce harmful stereotypes or biases. Document the representativeness and limitations of the data.

• Health-related Data: Handle any medical or health-related datasets with particular caution. Clearly state limitations on use, prevent inappropriate re-identification, and require that participants adhere to all relevant health data regulations (e.g., HIPAA, GDPR).

• Responsible Use Agreements: Require data users to accept clear terms of use covering privacy, ethics, and non-misuse of the data.

(6) Inclusivity and Accessibility

• Encourage participation from a broad range of researchers, including early-career scientists and underrepresented groups.

• Provide clear instructions, tutorials, or starter code to lower entry barriers for participants with fewer resources.

• Consider global accessibility: account for time zones, varying internet access, and the need for hybrid/virtual participation options when possible.

(7) Confidentiality

• Treat submissions, participant information, and unpublished data as confidential until officially released.

• Do not use privileged information (e.g., system descriptions, unpublished results) for personal or professional advantage.

(8) Accountability

• Report any suspected misconduct (plagiarism, harassment, data misuse, rule-breaking) to the ISCA Ethics committee promptly.

• Cooperate fully with the ISCA Ethics committee in investigating and resolving issues.

• Respect and implement findings or recommendations from the ISCA Ethics Committee.

(9) Breaches of the Code - Any organizers who violate the code of conduct will be reported to the ISCA Ethics Committee. The Committee will conduct a detailed and timely investigation into the report, ensuring that all relevant parties are given an opportunity to be heard and that conclusions are based on evidence. The ISCA Ethics Committee reserves the right to make final determinations in all such cases. 

Possible sanctions for organizers found to be in breach of the code of conduct may include:

• Removal of the session from the Interspeech program, Interspeech proceedings, workshop proceedings and/or ISCA archive,

• Replacement or exclusion of organisers from review or decision processes,

• Restrictions on future roles as Interspeech challenge, special session, tutorial and workshop organisers, 

• Exclusion from participation in future ISCA events and/or Interspeech conferences, and/or

• Formal notification to the ISCA Board for further action if warranted.