Publication Ethics Statement
Journal Complaints and Appeals
Emancipations is committed to addressing any pre- or post-publication complaints and appeals in a fair and timely manner. Authors and other scholars wishing to make complaints and appeals must contact the Editors-in-Chief of the journal, either in writing or via email (please see the Contact Us page for information), providing the manuscript number and any evidence relevant to the case. ‘Complaints’ usually raise concerns regarding the ethical integrity and fairness of the editorial process, while ‘appeals’ allege an error in the assessment of the article or review process. The Editors-in-Chief will acknowledge receipt of complaints and appeals within 5 business days and will provide a final decision within 30 days of receipt of the original complaint. When appropriate, the journal will issue a correction or retraction with a notice linked to the original article. If the complainant remains unsatisfied with the resolution they may refer the matter to COPE.
Allegations of Research Misconduct
Emancipations seeks to ensure that it publishes research that meets the highest ethical standards. Anyone may submit an allegation of research misconduct to the Editors-in-Chief in writing or via email (please see the Contact Us page for information). Research misconduct includes plagiarism, unacknowledged use of AI (see AI policy for more information), the use of superfluous references to boost citation count, as well as the falsification and fabrication of data. The complainant should provide as much supporting evidence as possible, such as highlighted text indicating plagiarism as well as source material. The Editors-in-Chief will acknowledge receipt of an allegation within 5 business days and will provide a final decision within 30 days of receipt of the original allegation. Author(s) will also be notified of the decision via the email address associated with their submission. In cases where the Editors-in-Chief are the object of allegations, an Associate Editor will convene an ethics committee comprising five members of the editorial board to determine the matter. Allegations of research misconduct can pertain to work that is already published as well as work that is under review at the time of the complaint. In cases concerning published work, the Editors-in-Chief may retract the article in question or issue an erratum. In cases of work currently under review, the Editors-in-Chief may require appropriate revisions to the manuscript prior to acceptance but reserve the right to reject the submission.
Conflicts of Interest
1. Definition of Conflict of Interest
A conflict of interest arises when an individual’s personal, financial, professional, or institutional affiliations compromise—or appear to compromise—their objectivity, integrity, or impartiality in the editorial, review, or publication process. This includes situations where secondary interests (e.g. financial gain, personal relationships, academic rivalry) may unduly influence decisions related to manuscript evaluation, acceptance, or rejection. Conflicts of interests may arise during research, writing, and publication processes. Conflicts may be actual, potential, or perceived, and must be disclosed to uphold transparency and trust in scholarly communication. When such a situation arises, the objective integrity of research publication will be safeguarded through the following mechanism.
2. Scope of the Policy
This policy applies to all individuals involved in the journal’s operations, including: Editors and editorial board members Peer reviewers Authors and contributors Guest editors and special issue curators
3. Disclosure Requirements
Authors Must disclose any financial support, institutional affiliations, or personal relationships that could be perceived as influencing the research or its interpretation. Should declare any competing interests at the time of submission, including prior collaboration with editors or reviewers.
Reviewers Must recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts where a conflict exists, including: Personal or professional relationships with the author(s) Direct competition or collaboration Financial interests in the outcome of the research
Editors Must avoid handling manuscripts where they have a conflict, delegating responsibility to an uninvolved editorial colleague. Should disclose any relationships with authors or institutions that may affect editorial decisions.
4. Management of Conflicts
Editorial Oversight: A designated ethics officer will assess disclosures and determine appropriate actions, including reassignment or rejection of submissions.
Transparency: Where relevant, disclosed conflicts will be published alongside the article.
Sanctions: Failure to disclose conflicts may result in manuscript rejection, retraction, or exclusion from future participation in the journal.
5. Updates and Amendments
This policy is reviewed annually and may be updated to reflect evolving standards in academic publishing and research ethics.
Data Sharing and Reproducibility
1. Purpose and Rationale
This policy affirms the journal’s commitment to transparency, scholarly integrity, and the advancement of replicable research in the social sciences. Recognizing the diversity of methodological approaches—from ethnography to econometrics—we encourage authors to share data, code, and documentation in ways that respect ethical obligations and disciplinary norms.
2. Scope of Applicability
This policy applies to all submissions, including but not limited to: Quantitative studies using survey, administrative, or experimental data Qualitative research involving interviews, fieldwork, or archival materials Mixed-methods designs and computational social science projects.
3. Data Availability Requirements
Quantitative Research Authors must provide access to the underlying data and analytical code sufficient to reproduce published results. Data should be deposited in a trusted repository (e.g. ICPSR, Dataverse, Zenodo) with a persistent identifier (e.g. DOI). If data cannot be shared due to legal, proprietary, or ethical constraints, authors must provide a clear justification and, where possible, share synthetic or anonymized versions.
Qualitative Research Authors are encouraged to share de-identified transcripts, coding schemes, and methodological appendices where feasible. In cases where data sharing may compromise confidentiality or cultural sensitivity, authors must explain their data protection measures and offer transparency through detailed methodological documentation.
4. Reproducibility Standards
Submissions must include sufficient detail in the methods and analysis sections to allow independent verification. Authors using statistical software should specify version numbers and packages used. For computational models or simulations, source code and parameter settings should be made available unless restricted by licensing agreements.
5. Ethical Considerations
All shared data must comply with relevant ethical standards, including informed consent, privacy protection, and institutional review board (IRB) requirements. Authors must ensure that data sharing does not expose participants to harm or violate cultural protocols.
6. Editorial Review and Compliance
Editors and reviewers may request access to data and code during the review process to assess reproducibility. Final acceptance is contingent upon compliance with this policy or provision of a justified exemption. Published articles will include a Data Availability Statement outlining where and how data can be accessed.
7. Updates and Amendments
This policy is reviewed annually to reflect evolving best practices in open science, data ethics, and disciplinary standards. Submissions involving human research subjects must receive prior ethical approval from the local institutional review board (IRB) or other appropriate ethics committee to confirm the study meets national and global standards for research on humans. For specific guidelines, researchers and IRBs may consider International Sociological Association’s Code of Ethics, American Political Science Association’s A Guide to Professional Ethics in Political Science, Economic and Social Research Council’s Research Ethics Guidance, or similar guidelines. A statement confirming this ethical approval must be included within the manuscript – typically in the methods or a similar section. Emancipations encourages post-publication discussion to facilitate dialogue among our authors and readers. Authors and readers are encouraged to submit formal replies, commentaries, or letters to the editor that engage with published work. Critiques and responses must meet the same standards of scholarly rigor, peer review, and relevance as original articles. There can be a maximum of two responses allowed by each author, so long as authors submit their responses to the journal within a reasonable interval of time relative to the original publication. Debates will be co-linked on our website to promote the circulation of each publication as widely as possible.
Minor errors that do not affect the main arguments or conclusions of the published work are addressed through corrections or editorial errata, which are permanently linked to the original article. In cases where serious errors, plagiarism, fabrication, or ethical breaches are identified, the journal issues a retraction, clearly explaining the reasons and maintaining transparency. Both corrections and retractions are made promptly once an issue is verified, and authors are notified and given the opportunity to respond during the process, ensuring due process. The journal retains all versions of each publication, with a note categorizing each at the top, so that readers can distinguish between original, corrected, and retracted materials.
