Publication Ethics

The NKRAFA Journal of Science and Technology adheres to the policies and procedures outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), established in 2017. The journal emphasizes responsible and ethical practices in academic publishing. The details of COPE's core practices are as follows:

Author Responsibilities

Before submitting an article to the journal's system, authors are responsible for ensuring that their manuscript is well-prepared, an original development, and free from plagiarism, data fabrication, or duplicate submission, which are strictly unacceptable. Furthermore, any conflicts of interest related to the research and publication process must be transparent, in accordance with COPE's code of conduct. The responsibilities of authors are as follows:

  1. Originality and Anti-Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that the academic or research article they have developed correctly cites the work of others. Plagiarism or the theft of others' ideas in any form is unacceptable. In the initial submission phase, before peer review, and after the revised manuscript is resubmitted, plagiarism will be checked using the journal's screening system and the Thai Journal Citation Index Center's “CopyCatch” application. Authors are therefore advised to be careful when using the words, data, or ideas of others without permission or citation. The journal expects published articles to present new knowledge.

Plagiarism is considered academic misconduct and will not be permitted for publication in the NKRAFA Journal of Science and Technology. There are several types of academic plagiarism:

  • Direct Plagiarism: Copying parts or the entirety of another's work without citation or permission, presenting it as one's own work.
  • Paraphrasing Plagiarism: Rewriting another's work with only minor changes and without proper citation, then presenting it as one's original work.
  • Mosaic Plagiarism (Patchwriting): Combining phrases or sentences from various sources into a single piece without proper citation, making it appear as original work.
  • Self-Plagiarism: Reusing one's own previously published work without citation or permission from the original publisher.
  • Accidental Plagiarism: Unintentional use of another's work without proper citation due to negligence, lack of knowledge, or misunderstanding of citation principles.
  • Global Plagiarism: Presenting an entire article written by someone else as one's own, such as purchasing an article from a ghostwriting service.
  • Incremental Plagiarism / Salami Slicing: Inappropriately dividing a single work into smaller parts and failing to cite the primary study, which can be misleading and is considered unethical practice.
  • Data Fabrication and Falsification: Altering or creating new data to support one's conclusions or hypotheses, which constitutes severe academic misconduct.
  1. Access to and Retention of Data: Authors may be requested to provide the raw data from their research for editorial review and should be prepared to retain this data for a reasonable period after publication. Intentional alteration of research data and information is strictly prohibited. Data fabrication or falsification covers actions such as deleting anomalous values or results, modifying images and graphs, as well as editing, adding, or omitting data.
  2. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: Authors should not submit the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously. Submitting identical research to more than one journal concurrently is considered unethical publication practice. Authors are responsible for ensuring that their work is not "published or under consideration" by another journal. Therefore, submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals, whether concurrently or years apart, should be avoided.
  3. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors must properly cite the work of others, including publications, data, and ideas that have influenced their research.
  4. Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Such individuals should be listed as co-authors. Authors must ensure that the submitted work has been approved by all co-authors, as well as their affiliated institutions.
  5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Authors should disclose any financial or personal interests that might bias their work. All sources of financial support for the work must be disclosed. Authors need to ensure that the published work has no undisclosed conflicts of interest.
  6. Fundamental Errors in Published Work: If an author identifies a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, the author is obligated to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate to retract or correct the article.
  7. Standards of Reporting/Publication: Authors must present the correct project number of the research and the significance of the research. Results must be presented clearly and straightforwardly, without altering data, fabricating new data, or inappropriately manipulating data.
  8. Studies Involving Animals and Human Subjects: If studies involving animals or human subjects are conducted, authors must ensure that all procedures were performed ethically and in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. Research projects presented in the original article must have received approval from a research ethics committee and clearly state the approval number in the article. Research ethics certificates for human subjects that have been approved can be requested for review during article consideration.
  9. Peer Review: Authors should cooperate appropriately and within the stipulated time with the peer review process and reviewer feedback. If they decide to withdraw the manuscript, they must immediately inform the journal editor.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers play a crucial role in assessing the quality and integrity of the academic publication process, thereby maintaining high academic standards. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) offers guidelines for reviewers to support responsible and ethical practices in the peer review process, in accordance with COPE's code of ethics. The responsibilities of reviewers are as follows:

  1. Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat all manuscripts under review as confidential documents. They should not share information with others unless authorized by the editor.
  2. Objectivity: Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and professionally. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting or dissenting evidence.
  3. Timeliness: Reviewers must complete the evaluation of articles within the stipulated timeframe. If unable to meet the deadline, they should inform the editor, and if unable to review the article for any reason, they should decline the invitation from the outset.
  4. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should provide suggestions for improving the manuscript if they find a lack of citation in sections where citations are warranted.
  5. Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that might affect their evaluation of the original manuscript. If they feel unable to review impartially, they should decline the invitation to review.
  6. Reporting Standards: Reviewers are responsible for informing the editor of any apparent similarities or overlap in content between the manuscript under review and other published works they discover.
  7. Ethical Concerns: Reviewers must inform the editor of any ethical issues identified in the reviewed article, including potential misconduct, data fabrication, data creation, or plagiarism.
  8. Constructive Criticism: Reviewers should provide constructive and thorough feedback to help authors improve their manuscript and suggest solutions to the article's limitations.
  9. Maintaining Integrity: Reviewers must avoid using unpublished information from the manuscript under review for their own research or personal gain. The intellectual property rights of the authors should be protected.
  10. Responsiveness: Reviewers can clarify, provide additional information, and answer queries or questions from the editor on matters related to the review.

Editor Responsibilities

Editors have significant roles and responsibilities in maintaining the quality, integrity, and credibility of published articles. In accordance with COPE's code of conduct, the responsibilities of editors are as follows:

  1. Fair and Unbiased Evaluation: Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts based on their merit, originality, ensuring impartiality and avoiding discrimination.
  2. Confidentiality: Editors handle all submitted manuscripts confidentially, using a double-blind peer review process where anonymity is maintained between reviewers and authors during the evaluation process.
  3. Transparent and Timely Review Process: Editors oversee the peer review process to ensure it is timely and efficient, as stipulated in the guidelines for authors and reviewers, including steps for manuscript submission, evaluation, and publication. They ensure that manuscripts are managed in a timely and fair manner.
  4. Conflicts of Interest: Editors must avoid making decisions on articles if they have a conflict of interest. In such cases, they should delegate the decision to other editorial board members or reviewers.
  5. Decision Making: Editors base their decisions on the quality of the manuscript, its relevance, novelty, and adherence to the journal's scope and policies.
  6. Handling Ethical Concerns: Editors take appropriate action, such as corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern, to ensure that articles published in the journal meet the highest ethical standards and comply with guidelines and regulations related to authorship, plagiarism, and various forms of misconduct.
  7. Publication Integrity: Editors are responsible for the integrity of publications by addressing issues of correction, retraction, or potential concerns.
  8. Focus on Quality and Integrity of Published Articles: Editors are responsible for ensuring that all manuscripts undergo a thorough peer review process and for appropriately addressing any issues or misconduct that arise.
  9. Managing the Peer Review Process: Editors are responsible for selecting appropriate reviewers for each manuscript, ensuring that the review process is fair and impartial, and managing any potential conflicts of interest.
  10. Supporting Reviewers: Editors are responsible for providing clear guidance to peer reviewers and acknowledging their valuable contributions.
  11. Engagement with the Research and Academic Community: Editors must actively engage with the research and academic community, promoting ethical practices, upholding high standards of excellence, and continuously participating in developments within relevant fields.

Publication Fees. There are no fees for manuscripts accepted for publication.

NKRAFA Journal of Science and Technology does not have a policy for expedited article publication. The journal requires authors to submit well-prepared original manuscripts that adhere to the journal's guidelines. Quality evaluation and feedback for manuscript revisions are provided. The editorial board is strongly committed to publishing high-quality works through a quality assessment process by peer reviewers in relevant disciplines.