NAJUA: History of Architecture and Thai Architecture (NAJUA: HATA) is a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics. All individuals engaged in the publishing process, including editors, authors, reviewers, and the publisher, are required to adhere to ethical behaviour standards. We adhere to the following principles of Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement, which are based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The following ethical considerations guide our 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. Additionally, authors must respect intellectual property and copyright laws.

      2. Plagiarism and Malpractice

Plagiarism, including uncredited reproduction of text, ideas, images, or data (even from the author's own work), is strictly prohibited. All reused text must be properly cited. Manuscripts will be screened with plagiarism detection software before peer review. Detected plagiarism will result in rejection and possible further investigation. Data must be original and accurately represented without manipulation. Fraudulent practices identified during peer review will lead to immediate rejection; if discovered post-publication, the paper will be retracted.

      3. Transparent and Fair Review

The manuscript review process must be transparent and fair. The panel of reviewers evaluating manuscripts should consist of specialists in the relevant field. These experts should be affiliated with different institutions than that of the author and have no conflicts of interest with the manuscripts they review.

      4. Addressing Unethical Conduct

In cases of alleged unethical conduct, the journal will handle such allegations in an orderly, transparent, and fair manner.

 

Ethical Guidelines for Authors

      1. Originality

Authors must ensure that the submitted manuscript is entirely original and has not been previously published, nor is it currently under consideration by any other journal. Plagiarism, fabrication, and falsification of data are strictly prohibited. Any instance of such unethical behaviour will lead to the rejection of the manuscript.

      2. Data Integrity

Authors must ensure that the manuscript accurately reports the data obtained from their research without any distortion or falsification of facts.

      3. Acknowledgment of Data Sources and Contributions

Authors must provide appropriate citations for all sources and references used in the manuscript, ensuring a comprehensive and accurate representation of the work of others.

      4. Affiliation Declaration

Authors must fully disclose their affiliations, organizations, and any beneficiaries associated with the manuscript to prevent potential conflicts of interest.

      5. Authorship Attribution

Authors must ensure that all co-authors have given their consent to be included in the manuscript and that all individuals who have made significant contributions to the work are appropriately credited.

      6. Informed Consent

For manuscripts involving research with human participants, authors must obtain proper informed consent from all subjects. Authors must also be qualified to conduct the study, adhering to ethical standards and institutional guidelines.

      7. Peer Review Process

Authors must agree to participate in a peer review process conducted by a panel of experts in the relevant field. This process will be carried out by the journal in a professional, transparent, and fair manner, free from any conflict of interest.

      8. Ethical Considerations

Authors must adhere to the relevant ethical guidelines for their research. They are responsible for ensuring that their manuscript is conducted and reported with honesty, integrity, and reliability. All ethical considerations must be thoroughly addressed to maintain the highest standards of research ethics.

 

Ethical Guidelines for Editors

      1. Impartial and Fair Review Management

Editors must manage the review process impartially and fairly.

      2. Manuscript Quality Review

Editors are responsible for assessing 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 will not be considered for publication.

      3. Plagiarism Detection

Manuscripts will be checked for plagiarism using trusted programs. If plagiarism is detected, editors will contact the corresponding author for clarification before accepting or rejecting the manuscript.

      4. Data Protection

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 about whether the manuscript is under another review process or is being edited or considered for publication elsewhere.

      5. Addressing Ethical Issues

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.

 

Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

      1. Confidentiality

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. Reviewers should refrain from discussing any aspects of the manuscript under review with others during the review process.

      2. Conflict of Interest

If a reviewer perceives a potential conflict of interest with the author that may lead to biased or restricted views, they should promptly notify the editorial board and decline the invitation to review the manuscript.

      3. Impartiality

The review process must remain impartial. Personal judgments without supporting data or evidence should not influence the assessment criteria.

      4. Identification of Relevant Research

Reviewers should identify any significant research findings that align with the manuscript being reviewed but have not been referenced by the author. 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, it conducts a thorough investigation transparently and fairly, adhering to the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) or equivalent standards. The investigation process is as follows:

• The journal appoints an investigation committee free from conflicts of interest with the alleged manuscript to ensure a transparent and fair investigation.
• The investigation committee rigorously reviews the complaints using plagiarism detection software and carefully analyses suspicious content to identify cases of unethical conduct.
• The investigation committee conducts a comprehensive assessment of the evidence to examine the allegations thoroughly.
• The accused author will be given an opportunity to clarify the allegations.
• The journal maintains confidentiality throughout the investigation to ensure fairness for all involved parties.
• If the investigation reveals that the author has engaged in misconduct, the journal will take appropriate action following COPE guidelines 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 and addresses 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 in publication, NAJUA: History of Architecture and Thai Architecture (NAJUA: HATA) encourages authors, qualified individuals, and readers to report any ethical concerns or misconduct they may encounter. Your input is crucial in ensuring the journal upholds ethical integrity.

If you have any ethical concerns, doubts, or suspicions related to NAJUA: HATA, please use the Ethical Concern Report Form available in the "Ethical Concern Report" section on the journal's website. The form includes fields for providing detailed and comprehensive information about the concern. All reports will 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 available on the NAJUA: HATA website. The journal highly values the concerns and complaints from its readers, as they contribute to upholding the ethical standards of academic publishing for NAJUA: HATA. Input from authors and readers ensures the journal remains a transparent and responsible research publication.

Ethical Concern Report

Generative AI Policy

NAJUA: HATA Journal establishes the following guidelines for the use of Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation to maintain ethical standards in research and academic publishing:

1. Authorship

Artificial Intelligence (such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, or other LLM tools) cannot be listed as an author or co-author, as AI cannot be held responsible for the accuracy and academic integrity of the work.

2. Scope of AI Use for Text and Content

Permitted: AI may only be used to improve writing quality, such as grammar checking and editing, language polishing, or translation.

Prohibited: AI must not be used to generate or synthesize the primary content of the article (e.g., Introduction, Literature Review, Methodology, Conclusion). Additionally, AI must not be used to analyze or interpret academic data, unless the technology is an integral component of the research methodology that is clearly and thoroughly described in the Methodology section.

3. Policy on AI Use for Visual Content

Permitted: AI may be used to generate diagrams and flowcharts, provided that the user holds the legal rights to use the tool under intellectual property law. AI usage must always be explicitly declared in the figure caption (e.g., "This figure was created with the assistance of [Name of AI Tool]").

Prohibited: AI must not be used to generate, modify, or edit photographs, maps, architectural drawings, or historical evidence. Furthermore, AI must not be used to create graphical abstracts, in order to prevent copyright issues and intellectual property infringement.

4. Author Responsibility

Authors must inspect and verify all content and visual elements produced with AI assistance to ensure accuracy, non-infringement of copyright, and the absence of plagiarism and AI-generated false information (AI hallucinations). The author bears ultimate responsibility for the content of the publication.

5. Declaration of AI Use

If authors utilize Generative AI during the writing and manuscript preparation process, they must include a formal declaration statement under the section heading "Declaration of Generative AI Use" at the end of the manuscript, preceding the Acknowledgments or References section:

Declaration of Generative AI in the writing process: During the preparation of this work the author(s) used [NAME TOOL] in order to [REASON]. After using this tool, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the publication.

6. Peer Reviewer Confidentiality

Peer reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading an author’s manuscript (in whole or in part) into Generative AI platforms to assist in evaluation, draft comments, or summarize content. Manuscripts are strictly confidential, and this rule protects against the unauthorized use or infringement of the author's intellectual property.

Reference Guidelines for AI Policy:

• COPE Position Statement: Authorship and AI tools
• Elsevier Policy on the Use of Generative AI and AI-assisted Technologies

 

Correction and Retraction of Published Articles Policy

NAJUA: HATA Journal sets forth the following guidelines regarding the correction and retraction of articles containing errors or violating publication ethics, ensuring accuracy, transparency, citation integrity, and traceability. These procedures adhere to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the recommendations of the Thai-Journal Citation Index Centre (TCI) via the Online Submission System (ThaiJO).

Once an article is officially published (assigned a volume, issue, and page numbers), neither authors nor the journal is permitted under any circumstances to modify, remove, or replace the original published file. Such actions disrupt citation systems and compromise journal integrity. However, if errors or ethical issues are identified in an already published article, the journal will address them through the following mechanisms:

1. Correction

Applied in cases where errors do not affect the research interpretation, discussion, or conclusions, or to rectify textual and typographical errors. Corrections are categorized as follows:

• Erratum: Errors introduced during the journal's publication or handling process.
• Corrigendum: Errors introduced by the author(s).
• Corrections must be executed by submitting a formal "Correction Notice" as a new article through the system for publication in the current issue. The journal will establish bi-directional links between the notice and the original article. Under no circumstances may the correction mechanism be used to modify author lists or authorship details.

2. Retraction

Applied to withdraw an article if the research is deemed unreliable or involves severe ethical breaches, such as plagiarism, data falsification or fabrication, duplicate publication, multiple submissions, or improper/unethical use of Generative AI (e.g., citing non-existent or hallucinated references).

• Guidelines: This mechanism serves to protect the integrity of the scholarly record. The Editorial Board holds final decision-making authority after providing the author(s) an opportunity to submit explanations and supporting evidence. Upon retraction, the original file will remain accessible on the website (without deletion or replacement) but will be permanently watermarked as "RETRACTED," accompanied by a published Retraction Notice detailing the rationale and establishing bi-directional links to the original article.

 

Policy Reference Guidelines:

• COPE Retraction Guidelines
• Elsevier Article Withdrawal, Retraction, Removal, and Replacement Policy