ETHICS
NAJUA: History of Architecture and Thai Architecture - NAJUA (HATA) is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in research dissemination. To ensure the integrity and credibility of our publications, we strictly adhere to the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), a leading global organization dedicated to establishing ethical practices and transparency in academic dissemination. We aim to foster a research community where authors, experts, editors, and all editorial staff uphold ethical principles and conduct their work without misconduct. As part of our commitment to maintaining ethical standards, we outline the following ethical considerations throughout the manuscript review process:
1. Manuscript Integrity: The submitted manuscript must represent honest academic work, free
from distorted study results. Authors should ensure that the manuscript is original, not
plagiarized, and not simultaneously under consideration for publication elsewhere.
Furthermore, authors must respect intellectual property and copyright laws.
2. Transparent and Fair Review: The manuscript review process must be transparent and fair.
The panel of experts evaluating manuscripts should consist of experts in the field relevant to
the manuscript. These experts should be affiliated with different institutions and have no
conflicts of interest with the manuscripts they review.
3. Addressing Unethical Conduct: In cases of alleged unethical conduct, the Journal will handle
such allegations in an orderly, transparent, and fair manner.
Publication Ethics for Authors
1. Authors must certify that the manuscript is original and has never been published elsewhere,
nor is it under review by other journals.
2. The manuscript shall report facts obtained from the research, avoiding any distortion or
dissemination of false information.
3. Authors must state their referenced materials in citations and bibliography at the end of
the manuscript.
4. Should the content show an attempt by the author to plagiarize, fabricate, or falsify
information, the submitted manuscript shall be rejected.
5. The author must notify the Journal of their affiliation, organization, and beneficiaries of the
manuscript to prevent conflicts of interest.
6. All co-authors (if any) must consent to submit the manuscript.
7. If applicable, the manuscript must adhere to ethics in research with human participants.
Publication Ethics for Editors
1. Editors must manage the review process impartially and fairly.
2. Editors are responsible for reviewing the quality of submitted manuscripts. Manuscripts are
selected based on their significance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the Journal's focus.
Manuscripts previously published elsewhere shall not be considered for publication.
3. Manuscripts will be checked for plagiarism using trusted programs. If plagiarism is detected,
editors shall contact the corresponding author for clarification before accepting or rejecting
the manuscript.
4. Editors are responsible for ensuring data protection and shall not disclose any information or
correspondence between the editorial board, reviewers, and authors to external parties.
Exceptions may be made if there are doubts regarding whether the manuscript is under
another review process or is being edited or considered for publication elsewhere.
5. Editors must address ethical issues and conflicts of interest that may arise during the review of
the manuscript, as well as any complaints received after the manuscript has been published.
Publication Ethics for Reviewers
1. Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscripts, associated materials,
and the information they contain. Under no circumstances should reviewers share this
information with anyone other than the editor-in-chief. Additionally, during the review process,
reviewers should refrain from discussing any aspects of the manuscript under review
with others.
2. Supposing a reviewer perceives a potential conflict of interest with the author that may lead to
biased or restricted views, in that case, he or she should promptly notify the editorial board
and decline the invitation to review the manuscript.
3. The review process must remain impartial. Personal judgments without supporting data or
evidence should not influence the assessment criteria.
4. Reviewers should identify any prominent research findings that align with the manuscript
being reviewed but have not been referenced by the author in the submitted manuscript.
Moreover, if any part of the research closely resembles or replicates findings from other
researchers, the reviewer should bring this to the editorial board's attention.
Ethical Consideration and Investigation in Manuscript Publication
When the Journal receives complaints or detects suspicions of ethical misconduct, the Journal shall conduct a thorough investigation transparently and fairly. Such allegations will be addressed following the guidelines set forth by the COPE or equivalent standards. The investigation proceeds as follows:
- The Journal appoints an investigation committee that does not have a conflict of interest with
the alleged manuscript to ensure the investigation of allegations is transparent and fair.
- The Journal appoints an investigation committee that does not have a conflict of interest with
the alleged manuscript to ensure the investigation of allegations is transparent and fair.
- The investigation committee rigorously reviews the complaints using plagiarism detection
software and carefully analyzes suspicious content to identify cases of unethical conduct.
- The investigation committee conducts a comprehensive assessment of the evidence
throughout the entire process to examine the allegations.
- The accused author will be allowed to clarify the allegations.
- The Journal maintains confidentiality throughout the investigation to ensure fairness for all
involved parties.
- Supposing the investigation reveals that the author has indeed engaged in misconduct,
in that case, the Journal will take reasonable action following the guidelines set forth by the
COPE or equivalent standards, which may include suspension or withdrawal of the publication.
- If the allegations are not substantiated, the Journal will notify all concerned parties of
the results.
- The Journal actively monitors signals and receives misconduct complaints throughout the
manuscript consideration process, from submission to publication. If there are concerns or
questions, the editor will convene a meeting with the editorial board for further action.
Ethical Concern Report
To maintain the highest ethical standards for publication, NAJUA: History of Architecture and Thai Architecture - NAJUA (HATA) encourages authors, qualified individuals, and all readers to report any ethical concerns or misconduct they may encounter. Their input is crucial in ensuring that the Journal upholds ethical integrity. If you have any ethical concerns, doubts, or suspicions related to NAJUA (HATA), please utilize the Ethical Concern Report Form accessible in the "Ethical Concern Report" section on the Journal's website. The form contains fields for providing detailed information about the concern effectively and comprehensively. All reports shall be treated with the utmost confidentiality. The Journal will handle each concern professionally and conduct a thorough examination to take appropriate action. Contact information and channels for reporting ethical concerns are on the NAJUA (HATA) website.
The Journal highly values readers' concerns and complaints as they contribute to upholding the ethical standards of academic publishing for NAJUA (HATA). Input from authors and readers helps ensure the Journal is considered a transparent and responsible research publication.