Publication Ethics

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) upholds the highest standards of academic integrity and ethical research practice. As a member of the global community of scholarly publishing, the journal follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines. Research misconduct undermines not only the reputation of individual scholars but also the credibility of the scientific record and the trust placed in academic research by society. Because SEM is often used to inform policy, decision-making, and interventions across diverse disciplines such as economics, education, psychology, sociology, and political science, even minor ethical violations can have significant consequences. SEM enforces a zero-tolerance policy toward all forms of misconduct.

  1. Plagiarism and Self-Plagiarism

Plagiarism is one of the most serious breaches of academic ethics. It involves presenting another person’s ideas, words, or work as one’s own without proper acknowledgment. This includes:

  • Direct copying of text, figures, equations, or tables from previously published work without citation.
  • Inadequate paraphrasing, where material is reworded superficially but the intellectual content is taken without attribution.
  • Self-plagiarism, where authors reuse substantial portions of their own previously published work (text, models, or datasets) without disclosure.

In the context of SEM, plagiarism may take distinctive forms, such as reproducing path diagrams, simulation designs, or model specifications developed by other scholars without acknowledgment. Authors are responsible for ensuring originality and transparency at every stage of their submission.

  1. Fabrication and Falsification

Fabrication refers to the invention of data or results that never occurred, while falsification involves the manipulation of research materials, data, or processes in a way that misrepresents findings. Both practices fundamentally distort the scholarly record. Examples include:

  • Inventing survey responses or experimental data.
  • Omitting cases, variables, or fit indices to create the appearance of stronger results.
  • Manipulating SEM outputs, such as modifying standardized loadings or model fit statistics, to produce a favourable outcome.
  • Suppressing results that contradict the hypotheses or theoretical expectations.

Such practices are especially damaging in SEM because of the method’s central role in testing theoretical constructs and causal relationships. Fabrication or falsification not only compromises a single study but can mislead subsequent research, policy, and practice.

  1. Redundant or Duplicate Publication

Redundant or duplicate publication occurs when authors submit or publish substantially similar work in more than one outlet without proper disclosure. This practice wastes editorial and reviewer resources, artificially inflates publication records, and may distort meta-analyses or systematic reviews.

SEM considers duplicate submission or publication to be misconduct, whether it involves:

  • Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals.
  • Republishing an article with only minor modifications in another journal.
  • Fragmenting one study into multiple publications without a clear scholarly justification.

Authors must disclose all related manuscripts, including preprints, working papers, or conference proceedings, at the time of submission.

  1. Authorship Misconduct

Authorship confers both credit and responsibility, and ethical concerns arise when these principles are violated. SEM requires that all listed authors meet the following criteria: significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study; drafting or revising the manuscript critically; and approval of the final version.

Misconduct in authorship may take the form of:

  • Gift authorship, where individuals are included despite minimal or no contribution.
  • Ghost authorship, where significant contributors are omitted.
  • Disputes over author order, which should be resolved internally among collaborators before submission.

Transparency about each author’s role enhances accountability and protects the integrity of scholarly collaboration.

  1. Breaches of Ethical Responsibilities

Research misconduct is not limited to textual or analytical issues but also extends to the ethical treatment of participants, data, and institutions. Breaches include:

  • Failure to obtain approval from an institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee.
  • Lack of informed consent from participants.
  • Misuse or mishandling of sensitive data, such as clinical records, student information, or political survey responses.
  • Ignoring data protection laws and confidentiality agreements.

These responsibilities are particularly important in sociology, political science, psychology, and economics, where SEM is commonly used to analyze human-centered data. Authors must demonstrate in their manuscripts that appropriate ethical protocols were followed.

  1. Consequences of Misconduct

When suspected misconduct is reported, SEM will initiate an investigation consistent with COPE procedures. The editorial team may request explanations from the authors and, if necessary, consult external experts or the authors’ institutions. If misconduct is confirmed, the journal may impose one or more of the following sanctions:

  • Rejection of the manuscript under review.
  • Retraction of a published article, with the reason clearly stated and linked to the original publication.
  • Notification of the authors’ institutions, funders, or professional associations.
  • Exclusion of the authors from submitting to the SEM Journal for a defined period.

These measures are intended not only to sanction misconduct but also to preserve the integrity of the academic record and protect the credibility of SEM research.