| name | jmf-transparency-and-data-policy |
| description | Use when preparing the reproducibility / replication and data-sharing materials for a Journal of Marriage and Family (JMF) manuscript. JMF asks for replication-level detail and Wiley applies a data-sharing policy with a data availability statement; many family datasets are restricted-use. Covers quantitative and qualitative transparency and the restricted-data path. Prepares the package; it does not waive requirements. |
Transparency & Data Policy (jmf-transparency-and-data-policy)
JMF expects enough detail on design and procedures to facilitate replication, and Wiley applies a
data-sharing policy requiring a Data Availability Statement for research and synthesis articles. Many family datasets
(PSID, Add Health, Fragile Families, NSFG) are restricted-use and cannot be redistributed — so plan
transparency around access, not redistribution. Live-check the current JMF/Wiley wording before upload.
When to trigger
- Building the reproducibility/replication and data-availability materials
- Writing the data availability statement for the manuscript
- Your data are restricted-use and cannot be posted
- A replication submission (materials expectations are central)
What JMF / Wiley expect
- Replication-level detail. The Method and any supplements describe the sample derivation,
measures, coding, and analytic approach in enough detail that a competent reader could reproduce
the study. Brief reports are explicitly welcomed for replications and important null findings.
- Data availability statement. Wiley's data-sharing policy requires a statement in research and
synthesis articles confirming whether data are shared and how they can be accessed; check whether
JMF adds journal-specific wording at upload.
- Analysis code. Deposit code that regenerates the reported tables and figures in an approved
repository (e.g., OSF, ICPSR, Harvard Dataverse) where data terms allow. Master script +
README + pinned versions + seeds.
- Qualitative materials. Share what the data terms and human-subjects protections allow (e.g.,
coding schemes, excerpts, evidence tables), with access controls where needed; do not expose
identifiable family information.
Restricted-use family data (the common case)
- State the restriction and who imposes it (e.g., data-provider agreement, IRB, privacy of minors).
- Provide README instructions on exactly how others obtain the data (application process, provider
contact, required agreements) so the analysis is reproducible by an authorized user.
- Where feasible, provide synthetic or derived data plus full code so the pipeline can be run.
- Cite the dataset and version precisely (DOI/release) so reviewers know exactly what you used.
Build-as-you-go checklist
Transparency expectations by data type at JMF
| Data type | What can be shared | Access path to document | Common trap |
|---|
| Public-use survey (e.g., some NSFG files) | Constructed analytic code + variable derivations | Cite dataset DOI/release; link repository | Posting a redistributable file you re-shaped without the version |
| Restricted-use panel (PSID, Add Health, Fragile Families) | Code + README; not the raw data | Application/agreement steps so an authorized user reproduces | "Available on request" with no access route |
| Couple/dyadic micro-data | De-identified derived measures where terms allow | Provider contact + agreement | Re-identifiable couples or children in shared excerpts |
| Qualitative family interviews | Coding scheme, evidence tables, masked excerpts | Access controls per IRB/consent | Exposing identifying family detail |
For the flagship journal of family science, the Wiley data-sharing policy and a data availability statement
sit alongside JMF's expectation of replication-level methodological detail. Because so many family datasets
are restricted-use, transparency at JMF is engineered around documented access, not redistribution.
Worked micro-example (illustrative)
A divorce-timing paper uses restricted PSID-linked data that cannot be posted. The transparency package:
(1) a data availability statement reading, in effect, "Data are from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics
(release YYYY) and are restricted-use; access requires a PSID sensitive-data agreement — see README for the
application steps"; (2) a master script that regenerates all six tables and two figures from the
constructed file, with seeds fixed for the multiple-imputation and bootstrap steps; (3) a synthetic dataset
of the same schema so a reader without the agreement can run the pipeline end-to-end and confirm it
executes; (4) precise dataset citation with release/version. The release year and agreement name here are
illustrative placeholders to confirm against the provider.
Referee/editor-facing pitfalls and the fix
- "How would anyone reproduce this?" Replace "available on request" with the concrete application process,
provider contact, and required agreements for the restricted family dataset.
- "Code doesn't reproduce the printed tables." Ship one master script that builds every exhibit, plus
pinned package versions (
renv.lock/requirements.txt) and recorded seeds.
- "Qualitative materials would identify families." Share coding schemes and masked evidence tables under
access controls rather than raw transcripts.
Calibration anchors (hedged where uncertain)
- That JMF expects replication-level detail and that Wiley requires a Data Availability Statement are
stable features; live-check whether the JMF upload workflow adds journal-specific wording or
repository expectations beyond Wiley's general policy.
- Brief reports are an established channel for replications and important null findings, which raises the
premium on a clean reproducibility package; treat this as a venue norm to verify, not a quota.
Anti-patterns
- Treating transparency as a post-acceptance afterthought
- A vague "data available on request" with no access path for restricted family data
- Posting identifiable information about couples, children, or families
- Code that does not actually reproduce the printed tables/figures
- Undocumented, un-seeded, unpinned code that "works on my machine"
Output format
【Replication detail】sample/measures/coding documented? [Y/N]
【Data availability statement】shared / restricted + access path drafted? [Y/N]
【Code deposit】master script reproduces tables/figures (OSF/ICPSR/Dataverse)? [Y/N]
【Restricted data】restriction note + access instructions + synthetic data?
【Qualitative transparency】materials documented within human-subjects limits? [Y/N/NA]
【Next】jmf-review-process
Supplementary resources
