จริยธรรมการตีพิมพ์

Editorial Ethics

The editor is responsible for providing detailed information about the academic works and research results published, such as the author, affiliation of the author, the origin of academic works and research results, etc., to the reader with the following duties:

  1) Conduct a preliminary evaluation of the article before considering the quality for publication in the journal under its responsibility.

  2) Do not disclose the information of both the author and the evaluator of academic and research articles during the evaluation of the paper. as stated

  3) Consider and decide on the selection of articles for publication after passing the evaluation process according to the evaluation criteria of the journal. This is based on the importance of the article to be clear and consistent with the context of the article and the purpose of the journal.

  4) Do not publish duplicate articles with publications from other journals.

  5) Do not refuse to publish the researcher's article. Because of doubts or uncertainties about the article. Therefore, evidence must be found to prove doubts first.

  6) There is no common interest with the author (researcher), co-author, evaluator, and journal manager.

  7) Check the article for plagiarism by using a reliable program to ensure that the article requested for publication does not copy the work of others. However, if found, the journal will stop sending the article to the evaluator and immediately notify the main author to ask for clarification on submitting the copied article for acceptance or rejection.

  8) Clarify the process of publishing academic works and research results in journals at all stages in writing. Submission of preliminary quality screening Quality Assessment by Qualified Persons Not less than 2 people will notify the results of the quality assessment to the authors. Conditional Publication and Rejection of Publication

  9) In considering and screening the quality of academic and research works, the editorial team must consider the accuracy, appropriateness and clarity of the content, techniques and methods of the study, and consistency with the current situation.

10) In case the author has a different opinion from the advice or suggestion of the quality evaluator of academic and research results, the author may appeal or clarify the issue of such disagreement in writing to the editorial board within 30 days from the date of receipt of the evaluation result document.

Ethics of the Author

  1) It must be certified that the submitted author's article has never been proposed or is being proposed for publication in another journal before and is not under consideration from other journals.

  2) The author should write the article in accordance with the prescribed journal format.

  3) The author must write in the facts from his or her own research. This will lead to false information.

  4) Author: If there is a reference to another person's article that is used in one's own article. References to the title of the article or author must be included in the content and references.

  5) The author must indicate the names of all authors who participated in the research.

  6) The author must also indicate the funding source that supports the research at the end of the article.

  7) The author must clearly state the conflict of interest that will arise from the publication of the article.

  8) If the author's article is related to the use of animals. This affects the results of research that are sensitive to the informant. The author must act in accordance with the ethical principles. Strictly comply with relevant laws and regulations and must obtain consent before collecting data or presenting relevant documents such as a certificate from the Human Research Ethics Committee or animal experiments.

Ethics of a Reviewer

  1) The evaluator must maintain confidentiality and not disclose the information of the article to others during the evaluation period.

  2) If the evaluator realizes that he or she may have a conflict of interest with the author of the article, such as being a project participant or knowing the author personally, or the reason for not being able to evaluate the article, the evaluator shall notify the editor or the editorial board of the journal to acknowledge and reject the evaluation of the article.

  3) The evaluator evaluates the article in the field of expertise. By considering the importance of the article. Article quality The subtlety of the article Analysis, Accuracy of Articles Any personal opinion or emotion should not be used without reason or evidence. Any reference comes to support the decision criteria in considering the article.

  4) The evaluator should advise the article and consider the importance and consistency of the article that the author did not identify or cite in the article.

  5) Article evaluator When it is found that the article that is being evaluated or considered contains any part of the content of the article that is the same or duplicate with the article of another author. The evaluator must notify the editor or editorial team immediately