The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal highlights quality of the authors’ works and the parties that provide supports to the authors. Thus, it is of great importance that all key parties involved in the publication agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior. The key parties include the author, the journal editor, and the reviewer.
Publication Ethics for Authors
Authors’ reports of original research works, review, and professional publication articles should present accurate accounts of their works such as underlying data and an objective discussion of its significance. The works should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the works. Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works. If the authors have used the work and/or words of others, they must appropriately cite or quote and/or ask for permission where necessary. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements and plagiarism in all its forms constitute unethical behaviour constitute and are unacceptable.
Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the research data supporting their paper for editorial review. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable number of years after publication.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship defines as those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the works. All those who have made substantial contributions should be put as co-authors. If there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the paper (e.g., language editing or collecting some data), they should be listed in the acknowledgements section.
Human Subjects: Ethical Principles
If the work involves the use of human subjects, authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. That is to say, the authors should ensure that their works are in accordance with the three Ethical Principles for experiments involving humans: Respect for Person; Beneficence and Non-Maleficence; and Justice. When requested, the copy of valid certificate as ‘satisfactory’/ ‘completing’ the certified workshop of Ethical Principals (usually valid for 2 years from the date of issuance) and the copies of written consents or evidence must be provided to Manutsat Paritat: Journal of Humanities.
Declaration of Conflict of Interest
Authors should disclose in their manuscripts any financial and personal relationships with other networks that could be viewed as influencing their works whether they be employment, grants or other fundings.
Publication Ethics for Editors
Decisions in Publication
Although the editor makes the final decision in publication, the editor may consult with the editorial board members or peer reviewers in making publication decisions. The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without biases in race, gender, religious belief, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. The editor should ensure that peer reviewers and authors have a clear understanding of what is expected of them in the Journal. The editor shall use ThaiJO’s submission system for all communications with the authors and the peer reviews.
The editor must ensure that the double-blind peer review process is unbiased and timely, and be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers. The editor selects the reviewers with suitable expertise in the relevant field.
The editor must protect the confidentiality and not use for personal advantage of all materials including privileged information/comments submitted to the Journal and all communications with reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers.
Declaration of Conflict of Interest
The editor must not be involved in decisions about papers which s/he has written him/herself or have been written by family members or colleagues. Any such submission must be subject to all of the Journal’s usual procedures. Peer review must be handled independently of the relevant author/editor and their research networks.
Publication Ethics for Reviewers
Unbiased and Timely Review
Peer review submits the comments to the editor on time. Through the editorial communications with the relevant author, the peer review assists the author in improving the paper with good reviewing etiquette. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review any manuscript or knows that the review will be impossible must notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process in the timely manner.
Reviewers must be treated any manuscripts received for review as confidential documents. and not use them for personal advantage, unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and the editor.
Alertness to Ethical Issues
Reviewers should bring potential ethical issues in the paper to the attention of the editor. These potential ethical issues could include plagiarism—any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper.