Roles and Ethics of Parties Involved in Article Publication for the Suranaree Journal of Social Science (SJSS)

The Suranaree Journal of Social Science (SJSS) realizes the importance of standards and ethics in publishing articles in academic journals.  For those involved in the publication process at the SJSS to have a clear practice and standard, the roles and ethics of authors, editors and reviewers have been established as follows:

Roles and Ethics of Authors

1. Authors must submit a manuscript that has never been published anywhere before.  All authors must sign the journal's form to confirm that the work submitted is new and original.
2. Authors must follow the format specified by the SJSS, as explained in  “Author Guidelines.”
3. Only those who have significantly contributed to and taken part in the research study or have responsibility in preparing the manuscript should be on the list of authors.
4. Authors must present information that is true and not fabricated in their manuscript.
5. Authors must not engage in plagiarism, whether copying from others or self-plagiarizing. Any content previously published elsewhere that appears in the manuscript must be properly cited and referenced.
6. Authors must state the sources of their research funding as well as their conflicts of interest (if any).
7. During the review process, authors must not publish or submit their manuscripts elsewhere.
8. In cases where mistakes are detected in the authors’ study or research, all authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of those mistakes.
9. Once the acceptance process and the preparation of the final manuscript are completed, the SJSS reserves the right to make any changes related to the article.

Roles and Ethics of Editors

1. Editors are duty bound to consider all manuscripts submitted to the journal according to the following aspects: completeness, relevance to the scope of the journal, whether it is considered state of the art, correctness, quality, and originality.
2. Editors conduct a preliminary review before deciding whether to put the manuscript through the formal review process. Editors then carefully select three experts in the field of the work to carry out a double-blind peer review process. Each manuscript will be reviewed by at least two external reviewer.  If it is authored by SUT personnel, all the reviewers must be from outside SUT.
3. Editors must not have any conflict of interest with the authors, reviewers, or the journal.
4. Editors must maintain the confidentiality of authors and reviewers throughout the review process.
5. Editors are responsible for thoroughly checking manuscripts for plagiarism using Turnitin software. If the similarity index exceeds the specified threshold of 30%, the editors will contact the corresponding author for review and necessary corrections. If the corresponding author fails to make the required revisions, the editors reserve the right to reject the manuscript.
6. Throughout the review process, editors must make decisions based solely on academic reasons. They must hold no prejudice toward the authors’ affiliations, gender, nationality, political stance, religion, culture, or academic position.
7. Editors must adhere to the journal’s established procedures to uphold its academic standards to enhance the overall quality of the journal.

Roles and Ethics 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 participation in the review.
3. Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of authors and reviewers throughout the review process.
4. Reviewers must not take advantage of 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 the 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.

Allegations of Research Misconduct

Retraction Guidelines

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

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

1.  It is proved that the publication contains unreliable findings, either as a result of major errors, fabrication, or falsification of data.
2. It is proved that the publication constitutes plagiarism, or the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or permission to republish.
3. It is found that the publication contains material or data without authorization for use.
4. Unethical research or research misconduct has been reported.
5. The authors have failed to disclose any conflicts of interest or failed to obtain agreement for publication from any other researchers involved in the research process.

If a publication is retraction, SJSS and its editors will take the following actions:

1. Issue a clear retraction notice on the SJSS website, including the title of the article, the authors' names, and the reasons for the retraction.
2. Notify the highest authority of the authors' affiliated organization about the retraction.
3. Prohibit the authors of the retracted article from publishing with SJSS for a period of 5 years.