Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Progress in Applied Science and Technology is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. All relevant parties—authors, reviewers, the editorial board, and the publisher—must agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior.

Our publication ethics statement is based on the COPE’s Core Practices guidelines (https://publicationethics.org/) and aligns with Elsevier’s Publishing Ethics policies.

  1. Submission Declaration

A submission to Progress in Applied Science and Technology implies that:

  • The work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract, a published lecture, or an academic thesis).
  • It is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
  • Its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out.
  • If accepted, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, including electronically without the written consent of the copyright holder.

Authors are required to declare that the submitted manuscript is original and that any part of the text or images has not been plagiarized or duplicated.

  1. Ethics of Authors

Reporting Standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. False or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted (see Section 7).

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author ensures that all contributing co-authors are included and have approved the final version of the paper.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

  1. Conflict of Interest / Competing Interests (General Policy)

Progress in Applied Science and Technology requires transparency regarding any potential conflicts of interest that could be perceived to bias the work or editorial decisions.

Definition: A conflict of interest (or competing interest) exists when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as patients' welfare or the validity of research) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain). It can be financial (employment, consultancies, stock ownership, grants) or non-financial (personal or professional relationships, academic competition, ideological beliefs).

Obligations for Authors: Authors must declare all relationships or interests that could influence or bias their work. A failure to declare conflicts of interest may lead to the rejection of a manuscript or post-publication corrections/retractions.

Obligations for Reviewers: Reviewers must recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts if they believe they have a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors or institutions connected to the manuscript. If a reviewer is unsure, they must disclose the potential conflict to the Editor for a decision.

Obligations for Editors: Editors must recuse themselves from managing manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest. In such cases, the managing of the peer review and decision-making process will be delegated to another Editor.

  1. Ethics of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.

Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

  1. Ethics of Editors

Fair Play: An editor will evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.

Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations: An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.

  1. Publication Decisions

The editor of Progress in Applied Science and Technology is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions.

The editor is guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

  1. Plagiarism

Plagiarism, in all its forms, constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Progress in Applied Science and Technology has a zero-tolerance policy regarding plagiarism.

Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:

  • Copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper without attribution.
  • "Passing off" another’s paper as the author’s own paper.
  • Claiming results from research conducted by others.
  • Self-plagiarism (redundant publication) without proper citation.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subject to screening for plagiarism using recognized detection software. If plagiarism is detected at any stage of the peer review process, the manuscript may be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, the journal will follow COPE guidelines regarding retraction (see Section 10).

  1. Declaration of Generative AI Use

Authors’ Responsibility: Authors must declare in their manuscript whether they have used generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process or preparation of the manuscript (including data analysis, image generation, or translation).

Method of Disclosure: A statement must be included in the manuscript (e.g., in the Acknowledgements or a dedicated section), explaining specifically how the AI tool was used. This disclosure promotes transparency and reproducibility. AI cannot be listed as an author or co-author, as AI tools cannot hold themselves individually responsible for the content of the paper or satisfy authorship criteria.

Editors and Reviewers: Privileged information obtained through peer review must remain confidential. Editors and reviewers should not upload submitted manuscripts into generative AI tools, as this violates confidentiality.

  1. Studies in Humans and/or Animals

Ethical Approval: For research involving human subjects or animals, the authors must ensure the work described has been carried out in accordance with internationally accepted ethical standards (e.g., Declaration of Helsinki for human experiments, and the EU Directive 2010/63/EU or similar guidelines for animal experiments).

Authors must declare:

  1. That the work described has been carrying out with the approval of the relevant Institutional Review Board (IRB) or ethics committee.
  2. The name of the approving body.

Informed Consent: For research involving human participants, authors must state that informed consent was obtained from all participants. Patient privacy rights must always be observed. Authors must obtain written informed consent for publication from any individual (or their parent/legal guardian) whose data or recognizable images are included in the manuscript. Verification of this consent must be provided to the journal upon request.

  1. Retraction Policy

Progress in Applied Science and Technology considers corrections and retractions as essential tools for preserving the integrity of the scholarly record. Our retraction policy follows the COPE Retraction Guidelines (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4).

Purpose of Retraction: The primary mechanism of retraction is to correct the literature and ensure its integrity, rather than to punish authors who make mistakes. Retractions are issued if there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, or if the work constitutes plagiarism or redundant publication.

Criteria for Retraction: An article may be retracted by the journal editors if:

  • They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error), fabrication (falsification) of data.
  • The work constitutes plagiarism or redundant publication.
  • It reports unethical research or violates animal/human subject policies.
  • It has been published on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process.
  • The author(s) failed to disclose a major conflict of interest that, in the view of the editors, would have likely affected the peer review or decision-making process.

Retraction Process:

  1. Investigation: Allegations of misconduct will be investigated carefully following COPE flowcharts.
  2. Notification: The editors will notify the authors and, if appropriate, their institution of the decision to retract.
  3. Publication: A Retraction Note will be published promptly in a subsequent issue of the journal. This note will:
    • State the reason for the retraction (referring specifically to the criteria above).
    • State who is retracting the paper (authors or editors).
    • Be linked to the original electronic publication in all forms (e.g., abstract, PDF, HTML).

Marking Retracted Articles: The original electronic article will be retained but will be clearly marked as "RETRACTED" on all versions (HTML and PDF) on the journal’s website.

  1. Publication Malpractice

Handling Allegations of Misconduct: In cases of suspected or alleged research or publication misconduct (including fabrications, falsifications, authorship disputes), the editors, Editorial Board, and publisher will follow COPE flowcharts and guidelines to resolve the complaint fairly and ensure the integrity of the scholarly record.

Post-Publication Corrections:

  • Correction: When an author discoveries significant errors, or when errors are brought to the editor’s attention, a correction (erratum/corrigendum) will be published promptly to ensureaccurate statements are maintained.
  • Expression of Concern: Issued if conclusive evidence of misconduct cannot be found, but serious doubts remain about the integrity of the work.
  1. Digital Archiving Policy

Progress in Applied Science and Technology is committed to the long-term preservation of its digital content. To ensure that all published articles remain permanently accessible and usable, the journal employs the following archiving strategies:

  • National Digital Library: The journal deposits its published content into the National Library of Thailand (NLT) and the Thai Editorial System (Thai JO) to ensure national-level preservation.
  • PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN): (ถ้าใช้อยู่) The journal utilizes the PKP PN to digitally preserve its content through the LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) program, providing a decentralized and distributed preservation system.
  • Self-Archiving: The journal encourages authors to archive the "Version of Record" (final published PDF) in their institutional repositories or personal websites immediately upon publication.
  • Internal Backups: All journal data, including manuscripts and metadata, are backed up daily on secure, redundant servers to prevent data loss.
  1. Self-Archiving and Deposit Policy

Progress in Applied Science and Technology supports the self-archiving of published research to increase visibility and impact. Our policy regarding the different versions of a manuscript is as follows:

  1. Pre-print Version: Authors are permitted to self-archive the pre-print version (the version before peer review) at any time.
  2. Accepted Manuscript: Authors may archive the accepted version (after peer review but before final formatting) in their institutional or thematic repositories.
  3. Version of Record (Final Published PDF): Authors are encouraged to deposit the final, publisher-formatted PDF in any repository or website immediately upon publication.

Conditions for Deposit:

  • There is no embargo period for any version of the manuscript.
  • The archived version must include a full citation and a DOI link to the original article on the journal’s website.
  • The version must be distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (or as specified by the journal).
  • This policy aligns with the standards of Sherpa/Romeo to ensure maximum transparency and accessibility.