The Journal is a platform for publishing useful scholarly contributions and studies to readers and the public at large. Publication ethics of all parties involved authors, reviewers, and editors are greatly emphasized by the editorial board. For purposes of ensuring proper adherence of work publication in the Journal by allied ethical principles and standards, herein below are publication ethics guidelines constitute:

 

A. Author's Ethics

1. Originality of the Work

Authors should ascertain that submitted work is original and new scholarly work, previously not published in any journal, and not considered for publication by any other journal.

 

2. Responsibility for Academic Integrity

Authors are accountable for their own scholarly work and are required to make sure that submitted manuscripts are free of any kind of plagiarism. This means it includes direct text copying, paraphrasing, presumably, without giving credit, or plagiarizing someone else’s thoughts or scholarly work and presenting it as their own. Every submitted manuscript will go through a check by plagiarism software. If it finds academic misconduct, it will be rejected unanimously and at once, and author’s institution might be informed/blacklisted for submission of manuscripts to our journal in the future. Full legal and ethical responsibility falls solely on authors.

3. Academic Contribution Responsibility

All listed individuals as authors should have substantially contributed to the preparation of work, or to research work. If it is discovered that a listed author did not work on preparing a work, it is reserved for the journal to withdraw publication of a work at once.

 

4. Completeness and Referees' Reliability

Footnoting other scholarly publications should be performed properly according to scholarly principles and ethic, with sources clearly labeled both in text and bibliography, as per the format outlined by manuscript preparation guidelines. It is the responsibility of authors to check for accuracy of references and verification of documents being cited, and also should not cite documents that have been withdrawn from database collections.

 

5. Academic Integrity

Authors should portray information with scholarly integrity, nondistortion, nufabrication, and nomanipulation of data so that it incorrectly represents the outcome of a study study or a research study to uphold its results to defend its conclusions it intends to submit.

 

6. Funding Sources and Conflict of Interest

Disclosure Authors should also mention the sources of research funding (in case) and clearly and Transparently declare potential conflicts of interest (in case) for maintaining academic impartiality.

 

7. Adherence to Manuscript Preparation Guidelines

Authors must submit their manuscripts to conform to the structure and style outlined in Manuscript Preparation Guidelines, to achieve consistency and for easy review process.

 

 

8. Revising According to Suggestions

Authors are obligated to update their manuscripts according to the recommendations made by reviewers and members of the editorial board during the allotted timespan. Negligence to do so can lead to a delay of publication, or even outright rejection of a manuscript by a journal.

 

9. Protection of Personal Data

If authors submit manuscripts containing personal information or proprietary information, written consent of data subjects should be acquired before use. If for any reason a dispute arises under law, responsibility rests entirely with authors. The journal shall withdraw the manuscript for publication immediately.

 

Adherence to the foregoing publishing ethics is an academic responsibility of authors. Acts of violation of these ethics may result in the manuscript being withheld for publication. The journal shall not be liable for any scholarly or other harms resulting from violations of these ethics.

 

B. Editorial Ethics

 

1. Policy Formulation and Dissemination of Guidelines

It is their duty to make announcements regarding policies, manuscript preparation guidelines, review practice, and other publication requirements of authors and to the general public clearly.

 

2. Preservation of Academic

The editorial committee is accountable for pre-screening articles to guaranteee their match of goals and scope of the journal, checking of scholarly quality, and preservation of standards of the journal conforming to requirements of the Thai Journal Citation Index Centre (TCI).

 

3. Verification of Duplication and Plag

The editorial committee should also institute a foolproof method of duplication and scholarly plagiarism check through credible software. If duplication of other people's work, short of specified limits, or scholarly plagiarism is discovered, duplication-review process should be halted and author should be apprised for explanations.

 

4. Managing the Peer Review Process

Editorial Board should guarantee a double-blind peer review process, which should be unbiased, equitable, and swift. Every article shall undergo evaluation by at least three qualified experts, who come from different institutions.

 

5. Confidentiality and Privacy

Editorial boards are prohibited from disclosing information of authors and reviewers to other unrelated parties during their review, and are prohibited from revealing article information and contents before publication.

 

6. Neutrality and Avoidance of Conflict of Interest

Editorial boards should have no conflict of interest with reviewers or authors. They should not be involved in decisions for manuscripts in which they are authors or have a vested interest, nor should they exploit manuscripts for commercial purposes or as their own scholarly work.

 

7. Manuscript Selection According to Quality

The editorial team should pick papers for publication based on scholarly value and value added to readers. The papers should not be published for the sake of authors or for the journal, other than based on reviewers' quality evaluation.

 

8. Clear and Transparent Procedures

Editorial boards should not turn down a manuscript based merely on a suspicion of ethical violations. Evidence should be scrutinized thoroughly, and authors should be offered a chance to give their explanations prior to a rejection determination.

 

9. Journal Quality Improvement

Editorial Board should keep the standard of the journal high and keep upgrading the journal for better quality and relevance.

 

10. Dealing with Complaints and Correcting

Mist The editorial board should also be in a position to handle complaints related to editorial decisions and published manuscripts and also have processes of correcting serious errors and retracting manuscripts discovered to have infringed research ethics, yet not having ignored errors and unethical behavior related to published manuscripts.

 

11. Refrain from Accepting Unauthorized

Editorial board should not ask for anything which may lead to illegal benefit for themselves from authors.

 

 

C. Ethics for Article Reviewers

 

1. Scope of Expertise

Article reviewers should agree to review manuscripts for submission only under areas for which they have great expertise. If a reviewer does not have enough specialized knowledge regarding a submitted topic, they should inform the editorial office immediately and refuse to review it soon after.

 

2. Principles of Critical Evaluation

 

Reviewers should make their evaluation of manuscripts on valid scholarly grounds, taking into consideration scholarly depth, thoroughness of contents, and value of study. Reviewers should avoid basing their evaluation of value of work on personal bias or subjective view otherwise not backed by empirical evidences.

 

3. Preservation of Academic Reviewers should understand their responsibility of presenting evaluations by papers free of conflict of interest. If a circumstance occurs which might reflect adversely on impartiality, reviewers should inform the editorial office at once and recuse themselves from review of a manuscript.

 

4. Confidentiality Obligation

Reviewers must maintain all information and contents of the given manuscript strictly confidential. Reviewers should not divulge, discuss, or divulge major contents to any third party other than directly concerned people of the review process until the manuscript has been formally published.

 

5. Awareness of Time Limits

Reviewers must pay attention to time aspects of review procedures, finalizing evaluation during a noted timeframe by the editorial office. If it's impossible to evaluate in a timely manner, reviewers are to discuss their situation with the editorial office to set an urgent corrective course of action.

 

6. Literature Redundancy Check

Reviewers of articles should also closely investigate originality of a manuscript. If there is a suggestiveness of redundancy with other scholarly articles or evidences of unacceptable plagiarism, reviewers are ethically bound to notify editorial office of such an observation in a clear and concise write-up.

 

7. Genuinity of Academic Ethics

Reviewers are not to employ any information, concepts, or information from the manuscript being reviewed for personal benefit, study, or publication prior to official publication of the original article. If it becomes necessary to reference afterward, it should adhere to scholarly standards and seek formal approval by the authors.

 

8. Contribution to Scholarship Advancement

Reviewers are asked to submit useful and meaningful feedback for manuscript improvement, pinpointing precise points of improvement and giving clear suggestions for improvement to raise the scholarly value of work.

 

9. Avoidance of Conflicted Guidance

Reviewers should refrain from recommending references of their own work or their colleagues unless it is necessary for manuscript improvement, which is an unacceptable attempt to derive personal advantage for themselves during review.

 

10. Reporting Ethical Misconduct

If reviewers suspect signs of activities, which are likely to amount to academic misconduct like plagiarism, data falsification, fabrication of information, etc., they are required to report the facts to the editorial office emphatically and extensively.

 

11. Adhering to Professional

Reviewers should maintain standards of scholarly excellence by critically evaluating papers honestly, with integrity, accuracy, and fairness, and thereby encouraging quality and standards of scholarly work for the journal, leading its advancement and credibility on a global scale.