Data & Transparency (spq-data-and-transparency)
SPQ's posture is deliberately different from open-data-mandate journals. It encourages researchers to
make data, code, and materials available, but this is not a requirement, and willingness to publicly
release data and materials has no impact on the likelihood of acceptance. The journal recognizes that not
all areas of social psychology — especially ethnographic and interview work — can share data practically
or ethically. Transparency at SPQ means clear documentation and honoring the ASA data-sharing norm,
not a verified replication gate.
When to trigger
- Deciding what data/code/materials to share, and how to describe your transparency posture
- Confidential or sensitive data (fieldnotes, interview transcripts, restricted survey data)
- A reviewer asked about materials, measures, or replicability
- Writing the data-availability and ethics language
What SPQ actually asks (verify current wording on the policy page)
- Encouraged, not required. SPQ encourages open data, code, and materials so others can review and
use them — but does not require it, and non-sharing does not lower acceptance odds. Do not write as
if it were a gate; do not over-claim "open" materials you cannot release.
- ASA data-sharing norm. As a regular practice, sociologists share data and documentation as part of
a research plan and generally make data available after a project's completion or major
publications, except where proprietary agreements preclude it or where confidentiality of
participants cannot otherwise be protected (e.g., fieldnotes, detailed ethnographic interviews).
- Quantitative materials (if shared). Data, code, and documentation sufficient to regenerate reported
results: master script + README + pinned versions + seeds + scale items.
- Qualitative / interpretive transparency. You generally cannot share raw fieldnotes or interview
transcripts; instead document the analytic process — sampling/site logic, coding scheme, and enough
excerpts for readers to judge — and protect participant confidentiality.
Confidentiality & ethics
- Protect participants: de-identify, aggregate, or withhold where re-identification is a risk.
- Honor IRB/consent terms and any data-provider restrictions; say so plainly if data cannot be shared.
- Submitting the same manuscript elsewhere while under SPQ review is unethical; flag prior appearance of
significant findings.
Good-practice checklist (not a mandate)
Anti-patterns
- Writing as though SPQ mandates open data, or implying sharing buys acceptance (it does not)
- Claiming data are "available" when consent/confidentiality actually preclude release
- No documentation of measures or analytic procedure at all
- Exposing participant identities to perform "transparency"
- Treating qualitative transparency as impossible and so documenting nothing
Output format
【Posture】what data/code/materials will (or will not) be shared, and why
【Encouraged-not-required understood?】[Y/N]
【Quantitative (if shared)】master script + README + seeds + measures? [Y/N/NA]
【Qualitative transparency】sampling/coding documented + confidentiality protected? [Y/N/NA]
【Ethics/IRB + ASA norm honored】[Y/N]
【Next】spq-review-process
Supplementary resources
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills → Social-Psychology-Quarterly-Skills/skills/spq-data-and-transparency/SKILL.md
1---2name: spq-data-and-transparency3description: Use when preparing the data, materials, and transparency posture for a Social Psychology Quarterly (SPQ) manuscript. SPQ ENCOURAGES sharing data, code, and materials but does NOT require it, and willingness to share has no impact on acceptance; the journal follows the ASA data-sharing norm and Code of Ethics. Covers quantitative and qualitative/interpretive transparency and confidentiality. Prepares the posture; it does not invent requirements.4---567# Data & Transparency (spq-data-and-transparency)89SPQ's posture is deliberately different from open-data-mandate journals. It **encourages** researchers to10make data, code, and materials available, but **this is not a requirement**, and **willingness to publicly11release data and materials has no impact on the likelihood of acceptance**. The journal recognizes that not12all areas of social psychology — especially ethnographic and interview work — can share data practically13or ethically. Transparency at SPQ means clear documentation and honoring the **ASA data-sharing norm**,14not a verified replication gate.1516## When to trigger1718- Deciding what data/code/materials to share, and how to describe your transparency posture19- Confidential or sensitive data (fieldnotes, interview transcripts, restricted survey data)20- A reviewer asked about materials, measures, or replicability21- Writing the data-availability and ethics language2223## What SPQ actually asks (verify current wording on the policy page)24251. **Encouraged, not required.** SPQ encourages open data, code, and materials so others can review and26 use them — but does not require it, and **non-sharing does not lower acceptance odds**. Do not write as27 if it were a gate; do not over-claim "open" materials you cannot release.282. **ASA data-sharing norm.** As a regular practice, sociologists share data and documentation as part of29 a research plan and **generally make data available after a project's completion or major30 publications**, except where proprietary agreements preclude it or where **confidentiality of31 participants cannot otherwise be protected** (e.g., fieldnotes, detailed ethnographic interviews).323. **Quantitative materials (if shared).** Data, code, and documentation sufficient to regenerate reported33 results: master script + README + pinned versions + seeds + scale items.344. **Qualitative / interpretive transparency.** You generally **cannot** share raw fieldnotes or interview35 transcripts; instead document the analytic process — sampling/site logic, coding scheme, and enough36 excerpts for readers to judge — and protect participant confidentiality.3738## Confidentiality & ethics3940- Protect participants: de-identify, aggregate, or withhold where re-identification is a risk.41- Honor IRB/consent terms and any data-provider restrictions; say so plainly if data cannot be shared.42- Submitting the same manuscript elsewhere while under SPQ review is unethical; flag prior appearance of43 significant findings.4445## Good-practice checklist (not a mandate)4647- [ ] Decide and state a clear, honest **data-availability posture** (what you can/can't share and why)48- [ ] If sharing quantitative materials: master script regenerates tables/figures; README; seeds; pinned versions49- [ ] If interpretive: document sampling/site logic and coding; provide representative excerpts; protect confidentiality50- [ ] Scale items / measures documented (in text or supplementary materials)51- [ ] Ethics/IRB and confidentiality handled per ASA Code of Ethics52- [ ] Preregistration linked (anonymized) where you used it — useful but not required5354## Anti-patterns5556- Writing as though SPQ mandates open data, or implying sharing buys acceptance (it does not)57- Claiming data are "available" when consent/confidentiality actually preclude release58- No documentation of measures or analytic procedure at all59- Exposing participant identities to perform "transparency"60- Treating qualitative transparency as impossible and so documenting nothing6162## Output format6364```65【Posture】what data/code/materials will (or will not) be shared, and why66【Encouraged-not-required understood?】[Y/N]67【Quantitative (if shared)】master script + README + seeds + measures? [Y/N/NA]68【Qualitative transparency】sampling/coding documented + confidentiality protected? [Y/N/NA]69【Ethics/IRB + ASA norm honored】[Y/N]70【Next】spq-review-process71```7273## Supplementary resources7475- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — reproducibility tooling and CAQDAS for documented interpretive work76- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — SPQ data-and-materials statement + ASA data-sharing policy7778---7980**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `Social-Psychology-Quarterly-Skills/skills/spq-data-and-transparency/SKILL.md`