1. Statement & Scope

The publication of peer-reviewed articles in VoxPoli advances rigorous, transparent, and responsible scholarship in political communication, media & politics, public opinion, diplomacy, and mis/disinformation studies. All parties—authors, editors, reviewers, the publisher, and the scholarly community—must uphold the highest ethical standards.

2. Editors’ Responsibilities

• Publication decisions. The Editor-in-Chief decides which submissions are accepted, based on editorial board input and peer-review reports, while observing laws on defamation, copyright, and plagiarism.
• Fair play / Non-discrimination. Manuscripts are evaluated for scholarly merit irrespective of authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality, disability, or political views.
• Confidentiality. Editors and staff must keep submissions confidential, sharing information only with corresponding authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, advisers, and the publisher as appropriate.
• Disclosure & conflicts of interest. Unpublished materials in submissions must not be used in editors’ own research.

3. Reviewers’ Responsibilities

• Contribution to decisions. Reviewers assist editors with impartial evaluations and constructive recommendations that help authors improve their work.
• Timeliness. Reviewers who cannot meet deadlines should inform the editor promptly so the manuscript can be reassigned.
• Confidentiality. All manuscripts are confidential and must not be shared or discussed; VoxPoli uses a double-blind process.
• Objectivity. Reviews should be evidence-based, respectful, and supported by clear arguments and relevant literature.
• Source recognition. Reviewers identify missing citations and alert editors to plagiarism, overlap, or uncredited use of data/figures.
• Disclosure & conflicts of interest. Reviewers must decline assignments when conflicts exist with any author, institution, political organization, campaign, or funding source related to the work.

4. Authors’ Responsibilities

• Report original findings accurately with sufficient methodological detail and references to permit verification or replication.
• Fabrication, falsification, or knowingly misleading statements constitute misconduct.

• Authors may be asked for underlying data and should ensure appropriate access and retention, while protecting respondent privacy and consent terms.
• For surveys/experiments, disclose sampling, instruments, preregistration (if any), and analysis decisions that materially affect results.

• Ensure originality and proper quotation/citation of others’ work; avoid duplicate or concurrent submission to other journals.

• Cite influential scholarship and acknowledge non-author contributors (e.g., survey firms, coders, translators, data repositories) appropriately.

• List as authors only those with substantial contributions. The corresponding author keeps co-authors informed and confirms approval of the final manuscript.

• Obtain ethics approval where required; secure informed consent/assent and protect participants in sensitive political contexts.
• Avoid harm and re-identification risks in reporting data from small or vulnerable groups; anonymize locations and identifiers as needed.
• Disclose any safety protocols used for field teams and participants.

• Disclose financial and non-financial interests (e.g., work for political parties, NGOs, campaigns, platforms) that might influence interpretation.

• Upon discovering a significant error, promptly notify the editor and cooperate in issuing a correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

5. Publisher’s Responsibilities

• Editorial independence. Advertising, sponsorships, or commercial revenue do not influence editorial decisions.
• Ethical oversight. The publisher supports COPE-aligned practices and coordinates with institutions, funders, or other journals when addressing ethical concerns.

6. Publication Misconduct & Actions

• Allegations. Suspected plagiarism, data fabrication/falsification, image/audio manipulation, citation manipulation, duplicate submission, authorship disputes, or undisclosed conflicts will be investigated by the editors.
• Context-specific concerns. Misreporting of survey methods, undisclosed partisan ties, deceptive research practices without debrief (where ethics require it), or endangering participants are treated as serious misconduct.
• Editorial actions. Depending on findings, actions may include rejection, request for revision, correction/erratum, expression of concern, or retraction in line with COPE guidance.
• Transparency. Authors will be notified of decisions; institutions, funders, or partners may be contacted where appropriate.