Chiang Mai Journal of Science

Ethics

The Chiang Mai Journal of Science is a peer-reviewed journal which follows the guidelines laid down by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding all aspects of publication ethics and, in particular, how to handle cases of research and publication misconduct. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article including the Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial Board, the peer reviewers, and the authors. The prevention of publication malpractice is one of the most important responsibilities of the Editorial Board. Any kind of unethical behavior is unacceptable and the Journal does not tolerate plagiarism in any form.

For Authors

1.The corresponding author must affirm that the article has not been previously published and that any rights to it have not been transferred elsewhere.
2.The corresponding author should ensure the originality of the work and that other relevant works have been properly cited in the list of references.
3.Authors should not engage in either plagiarism or self-plagiarism.
4.In preparing their manuscript, authors should ensure that they strictly follow the Guidelines for Authors which are available on the website of the Chiang Mai Journal of Science.
5.Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. It is also expected that the author will not submit old manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal.
6.Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Apart from the corresponding author, others who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all of the co-authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and to the inclusion of their names as co-authors.
7.Apart from citations, the author(s) should not include any personal information that may make the identity of a person recognizable in any way.
8.If there are any suspicions of data falsification or fabrication, the authors must provide the Editor-in-Chief with supporting information and details of the work as requested.
9.If at any time, the author(s) discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, it must be reported immediately to the Editor-in Chief.
10. When submitting the manuscript, the corresponding author must declare any possible conflicts of interest arising from the work itself, research expenses, consultant expenses, or intellectual property rights.

For Editors

1. Following an initial screening, the Editor-in-Chief can accept, reject, or request modifications to a manuscript before it is passed on to the appropriate Associate Editor for further processing.
2. Editors should be responsible for every article published in the Journal.
3. Editors may communicate with other editors or reviewers in the course of making their final decision.
4. An Editor has to evaluate the manuscript objectively for publication, judging each on its quality without taking into account nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the authors. He/she should decline his/her assignment when there is a potential conflict of interest.
5. Editors need to ensure that the document that is sent to the reviewer does not contain the information of the author(s).
6. The Editor-in-Chief’s decision should be informed to the corresponding author accompanied by the reviewers’ comments.
7. Editors should respect requests from authors that an individual should not review their submission provided that they are well-reasoned and practicable.
8. Editors and all editorial staff should guarantee the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript.
9. Editors should be guided by COPE flowcharts if there is suspected misconduct or disputed authorship.

For Reviewers

Reviewers should comment on any possible ethical questions and/or research and publication misconduct.
1. Reviewers should perform their duty in a timely manner and should notify the Editor responsible if they cannot complete their review on time.
2.Reviewers must strictly maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript.
3.Reviewers should not agree to review a manuscript in which there is a potentialconflict of interest between them and any of the authors.