Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

The editorial board will designate at least three experts to evaluate the quality of each manuscript for publication in the journal. These experts must have specialised knowledge in the relevant subject or a topic closely linked to the article’s content, as well as no conflicts of interest with the author.

The evaluation is undertaken in a double-blind manner, with the authors’ names disguised from the reviewers and the writers unaware of the reviewers’ identities.

The evaluation results can be one of four types:

  1. Accept the article for publication.
  2. Request revisions.
  3. Resubmit for a new evaluation.
  4. Reject the article for publication.

Therefore, to ensure the accurate dissemination of academic work in line with international publication standards, the editorial board has established ethical guidelines for publishing research work. All parties involved must strictly adhere to the principles and standards of publication ethics according to their roles and responsibilities as follows:       

Editor Ethics

  1. Examine and review the content of articles submitted for publication in the Chiang Mai Rajabhat Education Journal, evaluating them based on their alignment with the journal's objectives and scope.
  2. Appoint at least 2-3 qualified reviewers whose expertise matches the content of the submitted articles for publication.
  3. Ensure the quality of the articles throughout the evaluation process and before publication.
  4. Consider all articles without bias toward the article or the authors regarding race, gender, religion, culture, politics, and the author’s affiliation.
  5. The editor must not have any conflict of interest with the authors or reviewers and must not use the articles or academic works for business purposes or claim them as their own academic work.
  6. The editor must not modify or alter the content of the articles submitted to the journal, the evaluation results of the reviewers, or obstruct or interfere with the exchange of information between the reviewers and the authors.
  7. The editor must strictly adhere to the journal’s procedures and processes.

 

Reviewer Ethics

  1. Reviewers must prioritize the quality of the article, evaluating it based on academic principles and reasoning without bias or personal opinions, and must not have any conflict of interest with the author.
  2. Reviewers must not seek benefits or profit from the academic work they are assigned to evaluate.
  3. Reviewers must be aware that they possess genuine knowledge, understanding, and expertise in the content of the academic work they are assigned to evaluate.
  4. If Reviewers find that the article they are assigned to evaluate is a copy of another work or has content very similar to other works, they must immediately inform the editor to verify the accuracy before publication.
  5. Reviewers must adhere to the evaluation timeline set within the specified timeframe and must not disclose any information about the article to unauthorized individuals.

 

Author Ethics

  1. The academic work submitted by the author for consideration to be published in the Chiang Mai Rajabhat Education Journal must be original and unpublished. The author must ensure that the work is not plagiarized or duplicated from other sources.
  2. The author must cite the works of others if any part of their work or any text is used in their own work and must include a list of references at the end of the article.
  3. The author must ensure that the academic article or research article is written correctly according to the format and type specified by the journal.
  4. All listed authors in the article must have genuinely participated in the research.
  5. The author must agree to transfer the copyright to the Chiang Mai Rajabhat Education Journal before publication and must not submit the work to other sources for publication after it has been published in the Chiang Mai Rajabhat Education Journal.
  6. If the academic work involves human or animal research, the author must attach a certificate of approval for conducting the research from the relevant ethics committee and include the approval number or code in the “Ethics Consideration” section of the content.