Replication Data for: Codes of Conduct at Political Science Conferences: Prevalence and Content

Academic conferences are important institutions for promoting new research and facilitating conversations about the field. As a venue for knowledge exchange, professional development, and networking, conferences ideally promote positive environments that make scholars from underrepresented groups feel welcome. Yet negative experiences at conferences are well-documented. Codes of conduct have been promoted as tools to re- duce harassment and discrimination. We examine the prevalence and content of codes at U.S.-based political science conferences and workshops. More specifically, we analyze whether and how codes address issues of sexual misconduct and identity-based discrimination. We find that 19% of 177 surveyed conferences have codes. Conferences that are older and larger are more likely to have codes, as are conferences that are run by organizations with permanent staff and relevant committees. We argue that effective conference codes must contain definitions, reporting channels, and enforcement procedures. Many of the analyzed codes did not explicitly define prohibited behaviors, specify mechanisms to report code violations, or describe consequences for misconduct.

学术会议是推动前沿研究、促进领域内学术交流的重要载体。作为知识交流、职业发展与学术社交的平台，学术会议理应营造积极包容的环境，让来自代表性不足群体的学者感受到欢迎与归属感。然而，学界已有大量文献记录了参会者在会议中遭遇的负面体验。学术会议行为准则（Codes of conduct）已被倡导作为减少骚扰与歧视的治理工具。本研究聚焦美国境内政治学领域的学术会议与研讨会，考察其行为准则的普及情况与内容架构。具体而言，本研究分析这些准则是否及如何涵盖性不当行为与基于身份认同的歧视相关议题。研究发现，在调研的177场会议中，仅有19%制定了行为准则。成立时间更久、规模更大的会议，以及由配备常设工作人员与专门委员会的组织机构承办的会议，更有可能制定行为准则。本研究认为，完善的会议行为准则必须包含明确的禁止行为界定、违规举报渠道与惩戒流程。但本次分析的多数准则并未明确界定禁止行为、说明举报违规行为的具体机制，也未阐明针对不当行为的惩戒后果。