Academic conferences are key sites for sharing research and building careers, but they also host documented instances of harassment and discrimination. Codes of conduct are widely promoted as tools to reduce those harms, yet their presence and substance at political science meetings remain uneven.
🗂️ Survey of 177 U.S. Political Science Meetings
This study examines the prevalence and content of codes of conduct at U.S.-based political science conferences and workshops. The analysis focuses specifically on whether—and how—codes address sexual misconduct and identity-based discrimination.
🔎 How the Review Was Conducted
- A sample of 177 conferences and workshops was surveyed for the presence of a written code of conduct.
- Existing codes were subjected to a content review that recorded whether they: defined prohibited behaviors, spelled out reporting channels, and described enforcement or consequences.
đź“Ś Key Findings
- Only 19% of the 177 surveyed meetings had a code of conduct.
- Conferences that are older and larger are more likely to have codes in place.
- Meetings run by organizations with permanent staff and with relevant committees are also more likely to adopt codes.
- Many of the codes that did exist did not explicitly define prohibited behaviors, specify mechanisms for reporting violations, or describe consequences for misconduct.
⚖️ What Effective Codes Require
- Clear definitions of prohibited behaviors
- Accessible reporting channels
- Transparent enforcement procedures and consequences
âť— Why This Matters
Low prevalence and inconsistent content mean many participants—especially those from underrepresented groups—may not be protected by clear policies at conferences. The findings point to organizational features that predict adoption and to specific content gaps that event organizers should address to make codes effective.
