CV: peer-reviewed journal articles vs. peer-reviewed conference proceedings

[Vader Was Framed]

Updating my CV and I have a new addition: a peer-reviewed conference paper.

I have attended and presented at several other conferences (not peer-reviewed) and those are listed under my Presentations section.

Under my Publications section, I currently have the following sub-categories (I'm in science)

in preparation

referred papers

books

non-referred papers

blogs

Should I just throw the conference paper in the referred papers section or call it out separately in some new section, say conference proceedings? I don't have a ton of peer-reviewed publications (4) so I don't have the luxury of having a bunch of sub-categories without having just 1-2 papers in each bucket..

probably over thinking this but would love to get other's thoughts on if they differentiate between journal articles and conference papers when they are all peer-reviewed.

[Eigen]

Two ways I'd go about figuring out the standards in your field:

Look at professors CVs. See if they separate the three out.

Ask on the Chronicle Forums- much more comprehensive advice than any of us here can most likely give.

[fuzzylogician]

Also look at CVs of other students in your department, especially ones who are getting ready to go on the job market.

I have: journal papers, book chapters, refereed proceedings papers, other papers. (I don't list things that are submitted/in preparation but I probably would if I were going on the job market). But your field may be different, so take this with a grain of salt.

[lewin]

I don't list anything in prep because I don't want to get scooped. But that's just my personal paranoia. Under review, yes.