Publishing Ethical Issues

       1.  SJSS, editors and reviewers are responsible for the identification and prevention of publishing  articles with research misconducts.

       2.  SJSS, editors and reviewers will never encourage knowingly any research misconducts or allow any misconducts to take place.

       3.  If in any case SJSS, editors or reviewers are made aware of any allegation of research misconducts, the articles and authors will be dealt with accordingly.

       4.  If in any case there are retractions or corrections of published articles, SJSS and editors will make an announcement and act accordingly. They will also issue an apology, if required.

Retraction Guidelines

A retraction of a published article many be initiated by the editors of Suranaree Journal of Social Science (SJSS) or by the author(s) of the article.

SJSS and its editors follow the guidelines according to the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) standard, which means that SJSSS and its editors will consider retracting a publication if:

       1.  It is proved that the publication contains findings that are unreliable, either as a result of major error or of fabrication or falsification of data.

       2.  It is proved that the publication constitutes plagiarism.

       3.  It is evident that the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or permission to republish.

       4.  It is found that the publication contains material or data without authorisation for use.

       5.  Unethical research or research misconducts have been reported.

       6.  The authors have failed to disclose any conflict of interest or even failed to get the agreement for publication from any other researchers involved in the research process.

If a retraction of a publication occurs, SJSS and its editors will:

       1.  Clearly provide a notice or announcement of a retraction.

       2.  Clearly identify the retracted article by including the title and authors in the retraction notice.

       3.  Clearly state who has retracted the article and why it has been retracted.

Roles and Ethics of Parties involved in Article Publication in Suranaree Journal of Social Science

             Suranaree Journal of Social Science realises the importance of standard and ethics in publishing articles in academic journals.  For those involved in the publication process in Suranaree Journal of Social Science to have a clear practice and standard, roles and ethics of authors, editors and reviewers have been established, as follows.

Roles and Ethic of Authors

       1.  Authors must submit a manuscripts that have never been published anywhere before. All authors must sign the journal’s form to confirm that the work reported is new.

       2.  Authors must follow the format specified by the journal, as explained in “Instruction for Authors.”

       3.  Only those who have significantly contributed to and taken part in the study, research or have a responsibility in preparing the manuscript should be in the list of authors.

       4.  Authors must present information that is true and infabricated in their manuscript.

       5.  Authors must not copy or plagiarise from others or themselves. If parts of work that have been published elsewhere appear in the manuscript, they must be referenced.

       6.  Authors must state the sources of their research fund as well as their conflict of interest (if any).

       7.  During the review process, authors must not publish or submit their manuscript to other sources. If authors would like to do so, they must contact the journal to cancel the review process.

       8.  In case of mistake detections in the authors’ study or research, all authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of those mistakes.

Role and Ethic of Editors

       1.  Editors have the duty is to consider all manuscripts submitted to the journal in the following aspects: completeness, relevance to the scope of the journal, state of the art, correctness, quality and originality.

       2.  Editors conduct a preliminary review before making the decision to put the manuscript to the formal review process. Editors then select two experts in the field of the work in the manuscript to carry out a double-blind peer review process.  Each manuscript will be reviewed by at least one external reviewer.  If it is authored by SUT personnel, all the reviewers will be from outside SUT.

       3.  Editors must not hold a conflict of interest with authors, reviewers and the journal.

       4.  Editors must maintain confidentiality of authors and reviewers throughout the review process.

       5.  Editors must check for plagiarism thoroughly by using acceptable methods or software. If plagiarism is found, editors must contact the corresponding author.  If there is no acceptable explanation from the corresponding author, the editors have the rights to withdraw the paper.

       6.  Throughout the review process, editors’ must make decisions based solely on academic reasons. They must hold no prejudice towards the authors’ affiliation, gender, nationality, political stance, religion, culture and academic position.

       7.  Editors must follow the journal’s procedure in order to maintain the academic quality and standard of the journal. Editors should also find ways to improve the quality of the journal.

Role and Ethic of Reviewers

       1.  Reviewers must have knowledge and expertise in the field of the work in the manuscript to be evaluated.

       2.  Reviewers must not have any conflict of interest with the authors. If reviewers are aware that they may have a conflict of interest which leads to unfair evaluation, such as reviewers’ familiarity with the authors or reviewers’ partial contribution to the manuscript, reviewers must inform the journal’s editors and decline the review.

       3.  Reviewers must maintain confidentiality of authors and reviewers throughout the review process.

       4.  Reviewers must not take advantage or seek benefits from the manuscript to be reviewed.

       5.  Reviewers must evaluate the manuscript in the following aspects: academic quality, clarity of presentation and significance to field. The evaluation must be based solely on academic reasons, without any prejudice.  Reviewers must be able to provide suggestions on theories, methods and references that may have been absent in the manuscript.

       6.  If the same or similar manuscript or plagiarism is found, reviewers must inform the editors immediately.

       7.  Reviewers must evaluate the assigned manuscript within the timeframe specified by the journal.