Aims and Scope

The mission of the Society Register (SR) journal is to publish original works of interest to the social sciences in general, new theoretical approaches, empirical research results that advance our understanding of fundamental social processes, and important methodological innovations. All areas of social sciences are welcome, with particular attention to sociology.
The journal is dedicated to exploring the theoretical accounts and practical dimensions of social life through a robust critical approach.

“Registering” societal change requires approaches that account for the different research methodologies used across social disciplines. That is why the Society Register focuses primarily on the critical dimension of research in sociology (society), economics (economy), political science (politics), pedagogy (education), and cultural studies (culture).
Society Register is an independent, non-political, non-governmental and non-profit-making journal. We welcome contributions from researchers irrespective of race, colour, religion, or nationality.
Authors from developing countries are particularly welcome.
Society Register publishes peer-reviewed original research, critical reviews or short communications on all aspects of societal change.

Society Register is a quarterly journal, and individual issues are published in the following sequence: Issue 1 – by the end of March; Issue 2 – by the end of June; Issue 3 – by the end of September; Issue 4 – by the end of December.

Peer Review Process

The rules for reviewing for the Society Register comply with the applicable recommendations of the Ministry of Education and Science, with reference to the general rules of decency and ethical guidelines in research (Dobre praktyki w procedurach recenzyjnych w nauce). By submitting an article for consideration, the Authors are granting the Editorial Board of Society Register the right to process the paper. They are accepting the journal's reviewing process. Articles accepted for publication in the Society Register must not violate canons of scientific rectitude and honesty or break the rules of ethical standards traditionally upheld by research. Manuscripts should generally be between 6,000 and 8,000 words for full articles (and 2,500-5,500 for discussions and research notes), including all notes, tables, graphics and references. Original papers with clear methodologies, innovative research findings, discussions & conclusions, cross-disciplinary relevance, and fitting into Society Register's thematic priorities will be preferred (in some cases, longer manuscripts may be accepted).
All issues of the Society Register, including special issues, are subject to exactly the same double-blind review process (see below).
Submit your article via the link: SUBMISSION [Register or Login at the top right corner of the page].

All articles submitted to the Society Register are subject to the following review process:

1. All submitted articles are initially considered for suitability for review by the Editorial Committee of Society Register (number of initial intra-editorial reviews: 1 or more).
2. At least two independent reviewers from outside the Editorial Board and not related to the institution publishing the Journal, as well as to the place of affiliation of the author, are appointed by the editors. The Peer Review System involves highly qualified individuals with an in-depth knowledge of the subject to be investigated (number of external reviews: 2).
3. Articles selected by the Editorial Committee will undergo a review by academic peers based on the double-blind review process (i.e. authors do not know who the reviewer is, and in turn, the peer reviewer does not know who the author is).
4. The manuscript is given an editorial number for identification at all stages of the editorial process.
5. The content of a review in its written form with the recommendation for publication, publication after revision, or rejection is known to the editors (in its entirety as confidential information and to the Author (in part returned to the Author).
6. The Peer Review Form (for reviewers) is available for download from the Journal's website and here. The website also contains Rules for Reviewing.
7. The final decision concerning the acceptance or rejection of the article is made by the editor-in-chief or section editor after consultations with members of the Editorial Board or the editor of a thematic issue.

Review Form

Anti-plagiarism Policy

To ensure the originality and high quality of published articles, the journal follows established procedures in its evaluation and is a member of the Crossref Similarity Check service. Similarity Check is an initiative established by CrossRef and iThenticate that aims to provide publishers with professional support in preventing plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct. A system is a high-quality tool for comparing documents against the world's largest database of academic content, sourced from numerous publishers.

Open Access Policy

Society Register is an open-access journal, with all articles published under a Creative Commons license Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International. The publisher provides open access (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all journal content, following the principle that freely accessible research enhances and accelerates global scientific development and knowledge exchange. 
Authors retain copyright and publishing rights to their articles, granting the Journal the right to distribute them under the terms of the CC BY-NC licence. 
The editors encourage authors to submit articles published in the journal to open-access repositories (the publisher's final version, VoR), provided they include a link to the journal's website and the article's DOI.

Publication Fee

Publication in the Society Register is entirely free (the journal does not charge authors any fees for the procedure of accepting and publishing texts).

Ethics Statement

1. Purpose and ownership of this policy

Society Register is committed to safeguarding research integrity, responsible authorship, and ethical editorial practice. This Ethics Statement is developed and maintained by the Society Register Editorial Team to reflect our processes and requirements. It is aligned with internationally recognised guidance, including the COPE Core Practices and, where relevant, recommendations from WAME and ICMJE, while remaining specific to the journal’s scope and procedures.

2. Core principles

We expect all parties involved in publication (authors, reviewers, and editors) to uphold:

(i) Honesty and transparency in reporting methods, data, and contributions.

(ii) Accountability for the integrity of the scholarly record.

(iii) Fairness and confidentiality in editorial evaluation and peer review.

(iv) Respect for research participants, including privacy, autonomy, and protection from harm.

3. Authorship and contributorship

(i) Authorship must reflect substantial scholarly contribution (conceptualisation and design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, drafting/revising the manuscript).

(ii) Ghostwriting (concealing a contributor) and guest/gift authorship (listing non-contributors) are unacceptable in SR.

(iii) The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all listed authors approve the final version and agree to submission.

4. Originality, plagiarism, and redundant publication

(i) Submissions must be original and not under consideration elsewhere.

(ii) Any reuse of prior work (including the authors’ own publications) must be properly cited and, where needed, accompanied by permission.

(iii) Plagiarism, self-plagiarism without disclosure, and unethical text recycling are treated as misconduct.

5. Data integrity: fabrication, falsification, and selective reporting

(i) Fabrication (inventing data or cases) and falsification (manipulating, omitting, or selectively reporting data in a misleading way) are unacceptable.

(ii) Authors must present methods and evidence in a manner enabling critical assessment. Where applicable, authors should describe limitations and potential biases.

IMPORTANT: Empirical articles must include replication materials and source data to enable the Editorial Team to verify the results obtained. It is recommended that, if there are no copyright restrictions, replication materials and databases be made available to all readers.

6. Conflicts of interest, funding, and transparency

All authors must disclose:

(i) Competing interests (financial, institutional, personal, or intellectual) that could be perceived to influence the work.

(ii) Funding sources and the role of funders (if any) in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or publication decisions.

7. Research involving human participants (mandatory policy)

Society Register publishes social science research that may involve human participants. For any manuscript drawing on data generated through interactions with people (including, but not limited to, interviews, surveys, experiments, observations, ethnography, participatory research, focus groups, or any identifiable personal data), authors must meet the requirements below.

7.1 Ethics committee approval or certified exemption

(i) Submissions must include documented approval (the Ethics committee’s approval) from a recognised research ethics committee (or an official certified exemption, where applicable) in the country where the study was conducted.

(ii) Authors are required to upload the official approval/exemption as a supplementary file at submission.

(iii) Manuscripts without appropriate ethical clearance will not be sent for peer review.

7.2 Informed consent and right to withdraw

Authors must confirm that:

(i) Participants provided informed consent to participate (and, where relevant, consent for recording, quotation, or publication of identifiable information).

(ii) Participation was voluntary, and participants had a right to withdraw without negative consequences, unless a justified exception applies (which must be explained).

7.3 Privacy, anonymity, and confidentiality

(i) Authors must protect participant privacy and use anonymisation/pseudonymisation where appropriate.

(ii) If anonymity cannot be fully guaranteed (e.g., small communities, elite interviews), authors must explain the risk and mitigation steps.

(iii) Identifiable details may be published only with explicit consent and a clear justification.

7.4 Vulnerable groups and sensitive topics

Research involving minors or other vulnerable groups, or addressing sensitive topics, must demonstrate heightened safeguards (e.g., additional consent procedures, minimisation of harm, support resources where needed).

7.5 Data protection and legal compliance

Authors must comply with applicable data-protection law (including General Data Protection Regulation where relevant) and describe secure data handling (storage, access control, retention).

8. Peer review ethics and editorial independence

(i) Society Register applies peer review designed to ensure quality, relevance, and methodological soundness.

(ii) Editors make decisions based on scholarly merit, without discrimination and without undue influence from commercial or institutional interests.

(iii) Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential, disclose conflicts of interest, and provide constructive, evidence-based feedback.

9. Handling allegations of misconduct

We take suspected misconduct seriously. When concerns arise (before or after publication), the Editorial Team may:

(i) request clarifications, underlying materials, or documentation;

(ii) consult reviewers or independent experts;

(iii) contact authors’ institutions when warranted.

Outcomes may include rejection, publication of a correction, expression of concern, or retraction, consistent with COPE-aligned practice and proportional to the breach.

10. Corrections, retractions, and the integrity of the record

(i) Corrections are issued for honest errors affecting interpretation.

(ii) Retractions may be issued for major unreliability, misconduct, or unethical research practice.

(iii) We aim for transparency in post-publication notices while respecting legal and ethical constraints.

11. Use of AI-assisted tools (disclosure and responsibility)

If authors use AI tools for language editing or other support, they must:

(i) ensure the authors retain full responsibility for accuracy, originality, and proper citation;

(ii) disclose non-trivial AI use that materially affected writing or analysis;

(iii) note that AI tools do not qualify for authorship.

12. Complaints and appeals

Authors may appeal editorial decisions or raise ethics-related concerns by contacting the Editorial Team. Appeals are handled by an editor not involved in the original decision, where feasible, and may involve additional expert review.

Contact: The dedicated contact channel for ethics queries and integrity concerns is provided on the journal website (About - -> Contact).

DUTIES OF EDITORS

Publication Decisions
The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published. The Editor-in-Chief's decision to accept or reject a paper for publication is based on its importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the scope of the journal.

Fair Play
The Editor-in-Chief and the reviewers evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the author’s race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, citizenship, or political ideology.

Confidentiality
The Editor-in-Chief and the members of the editorial staff must ensure that all material submitted to the journal remains confidential while under review. The Editor-in-Chief and the editorial staff must not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in the submitted manuscript must not be used by the Editor-in-Chief and the members of the editorial staff in their own research without the express written consent of the author.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
The peer-review process assists the Editor-in-Chief and the members of the editorial staff in making editorial decisions and helps the author to improve their manuscript.

Promptness
Any reviewer who feels unqualified to review the manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should contact the Editor-in-Chief so as to excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review should be treated with strict confidentiality. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except when authorised by the Editor-in-Chief.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly, with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. Any similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper should be reported to the Editor-in-Chief.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through the peer review process must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript.

DUTIES OF AUTHORS

Reporting Standards
The authors of manuscripts should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. The manuscript should contain sufficient details and references to permit others to replicate the study. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention
The authors may be asked to provide the raw data from their investigations for editorial review and should be prepared to make such data publicly available for a reasonable period after publication of their paper.

Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely their own original work, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, it needs to be cited or quoted.

Anti-plagiarism measures
To guarantee the originality and high quality of the published articles, the journal follows established procedures in its evaluation and is a member of the CrossCheck service.
CrossCheck is an initiative established by CrossRef and iThenticate that provides publishers with professional support to prevent plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct. A system is a high-quality tool for comparing documents against the world's largest database of academic content, sourced from numerous publishers.