Publication Ethics

The Arts and Culture Journal of the Lower Moon River prescribe publication ethics in accordance with ethical standard by Committee on Publication Ethics: COPE in comprised of the role of editor, reviewers, authors and readers. The Arts and Culture Journal of the Lower Moon River is aimed for the relates persons in the Journal, who can follow the role under the fixed standard of transparency and reliable within academic circle. The roles of editors, advising editor, editor, section edition, editorial board, reviewers, authors are shown as follows:
Roles of Editors
The editors include advising editor, editor, section editor, and editorial board who have roles shown as follows:
1. Roles of Advising Editor
   1.1 Study and doing research on the academic relates with conserve, inherit and promote arts and culture, learning resources, local wisdom, including the direction of Journal quality improvement to create the pathway for amend and quality improvement for this Journal continuously.
   1.2 Advise, promote and support resources for journal operation to the standard guideline from Citation Index Centre : TCI). 
2. Roles of Editor
   2.1 Create guideline for authors, standard articles consideration for acceptance, format of academic article, writing style of references under international standard published on the website.
   2.2 Consider the type of articles, scope of the Journal, and basic format of academic article, avoid the conflict of interest.
   2.3 Examine plagiarism, including self-plagiarism in the articles, with this consideration of rejected the articles immediately.
   2.4 Prescribe the editor from the editorial board, tracking and directing the process of each article in quality under the transparency and validation.
   2.5 Validate the quality of the articles from the reviewers with deadline of timeline.
   2.6 Making decision for quality of articles from assessment results report from reviewers as follows: 
       1. Accepted under the quality on assessment from two on three peer-reviewers. 
       2. Rejected if two in three peer-reviewers rejected the publication and need to inform authors under the empirical evident base.
   2.7 If authors show the controversial evidence from the peer-reviewers, the assessment need to consider again in editorial board and need to inform meeting report to the authors every time.
   2.8 Editor must be a person, who examine the correct articles before handling booklet and published strictly on time of the Journal via ThaiJo system.
   2.9 If an error occurs from the Journal process under the refrain from duty of editor, editor must show the responsibility.
3. Roles of Section Editor and Editorial Board
   3.1 Section editors must take care the process of assessment of each article, when assignment and need to give feedback for the improvement of articles and giving the feedback to editor.
   3.2 Meeting and consideration of guideline plan, Creates the guideline for authors, basic criteria for consideration, article formats, Writing the references style under the international standard, assessment form for article and improvement of the Journal continuously.
   3.3 Scrutinize, recruit, and select and delivery articles to the qualified peer-reviewers for quality of assessment and useful for the author and readers.
   3.4 Regulate the quality of the Journal follows the standard guideline of The Thai Citation Index (TCI).
   3.5 Meeting for consideration of articles, which controversial evidence and need to follow the publication ethics of the academic Journal.
Roles of Reviewers
1. Consider the time for assessment and select to assess the articles based on subject that related to their own profession on those articles, by avoiding with conflict of interest.
2. Assess the quality of academic and research articles academically and aiming to quality improvement of the Journal under the standard Thai Citation Index (TCI).
3. Assess the articles and forward the result from the assessment under the deadline, including the useful feedback for the authors and readers.
4. Conclude the result of article assessment such as 1) Acceptance for publication 2) Acceptance with correction 3) Need to submit again and 4) Reject for publication.
Roles of Authors
1. Consider the types of articles, scope of Journal and Writing format completely. Examine the content of the article that match to the standard of the Journal.
2. If wishes to submit the articles, the articles must not be in the process of consideration in other Journals or other proceedings and must not be published in anywhere elses or be part of any publication such as abstract, research results or full article in any Journals or Proceedings.
3. Authors must avoid Plagiarism and Self-Plagiarism.
4. The submission must follow the process of the Journal. If in doubt, contact the direct Journal before submits to the ThaiJo system.
5. Authors can argue the results of consideration of article by provide the clear evidence and explanation to the editor for second consideration again.
6. Authors must follow the article via ThaiJo system until the end of process of The Journal.
Roles of Readers
1. Readers can read abstract, download the full research and academic article via ThaiJo system.
2. If bring phrases in the articles from the Journal to use, reader must reference the data within articles completely.
3. If readers found the plagiarism or self-plagiarism within the articles published in The Arts and Culture Journal of the Lower Moon River, inform to the Journal for examination for the utilization of academic circle and improvement of the Journal continuously.
Quality Assessment of Articles
1. Incoming Articles will be assessed the quality of academic publication by the three-qualified in the related field of article with double blind Review process.
2. Timeline of the article assessment follows the work process of the Journal.
3. Decision consideration will classify the quality of articles as follows: 1 Accepted for publication with two in three peer-reviews decision and 2. Rejected for publication with two in three peer reviewer rejection and informs authors with empirical evidence.
4. Be able to argue the results of consideration, but it needs the empirical evidence for explanation to the editor and be able to change the results of consideration if clear evidence pass the agreement from the editorial board. The final decision from the editorial board is the final decision.
Note: Translated and updated information from Committee on Publication Ethics ( and Thai-Journal Citation Index (TCI) Centre (