Publication Ethics | Journal of SciTech-ASEAN

The Editor is responsible for all content published in the Journal. The responsibilities include the following:

Meeting the needs of readers and researchers.
Regularly updating the journal.
Certifying the quality of published research.
Supporting freedom of expression.
Maintaining the accuracy of academic works.
Protecting intellectual property standards from business interests.
Willingness to correct publication errors, provide clarification, make removals, and issue apologies when necessary.

Ensuring the quality of the published article and maintaining the journal’s standards.
The editor's decision to accept or reject a research article should be based on the article's importance, relevance, freshness, clarity, and alignment with the journal’s scope.
Editors should clarify the review process for evaluating articles and be prepared to address any deviations from the stated process.
The journal should provide an avenue for researchers to appeal if they disagree with the editor’s decision.
Editors should provide clear recommendations to the researcher on all matters that need attention, ensuring recommendations are updated and referenced in the journal’s regulations.
Once an article has been rejected, the decision should not be reversed unless a serious issue occurs during the review process.
New editors should not change a decision made by a previous editor unless a significant issue has been identified.

Editors should provide clear and up-to-date recommendations to article reviewers and maintain links or references to these regulations.
There should be a system in place to protect the personal information of reviewers, unless the journal operates an open review system and has informed both the researcher and the reviewer in advance.

Editors must ensure that articles submitted to the journal are kept confidential during the review process.

Editors should follow the procedures outlined by the Publication Ethics Committee when handling complaints.
Editors must respond promptly to complaints and inform the complainant of the appeal process if they are not satisfied. This process should be clearly visible in the journal, with instructions on how to escalate unresolved issues to the Publication Ethics Committee.

Editors should ensure that every section of a published article adheres to recognized international ethical principles.
Editors should verify that all published research is approved by an authoritative body (e.g., Research Ethics Committee). However, approval does not guarantee the research's ethical validity.

Editors must protect personal data as confidential (e.g., the relationship between patients and doctors). Written consent must be obtained from individuals if their name or image appears in an article. In cases where consent is difficult to obtain but the article is important to the public, the editor may proceed without written consent if no objection is raised.

Editors are responsible for monitoring suspected misconduct, both in published and unpublished research articles.
Editors should not reject articles solely on the basis of potential issues but should investigate further to uncover the facts.
Editors should seek answers from the accused party, and if unsatisfied, escalate the matter to relevant authorities for investigation.
The editor should follow the steps outlined by the Publication Ethics Committee when necessary, striving to resolve issues through thorough fact-finding.

If inaccuracies or misunderstandings are identified in an already published article, the editor must correct them promptly and clearly.
If misconduct is confirmed after investigation, the editor should retract the article with a clear explanation, and this retraction must be communicated to readers and included in relevant databases.

A system must be in place to manage conflicts of interest between editors, journal staff, researchers, article evaluators, and editorial board members.

Reviewers must strictly respect the confidentiality of the evaluation process. They should not share the content of the article or consult with other researchers. The reviewer may not reference the article’s content without written permission from the author, which must be obtained through the editor. Any information gained during the evaluation process must remain confidential and not be used for personal gain.

If a reviewer is aware of any personal or professional connection to the research, author, or institution that could compromise their impartiality, they should notify the editor and decline to review the article. Conflicts of interest may include competition, financial relationships, or other associations with the article or its author.

Articles should be evaluated based on their merits, including their impact on the field, the quality of authorship, and the clarity of the arguments supported by evidence. Personal opinions or biases without empirical evidence should not influence the review process.

Reviewers should identify any significant research that is relevant to the article but has not been cited by the author. The reviewer should notify the editor if the article appears to overlap or be similar to other published work.

Researchers must be honest in their work, ensuring that they do not plagiarize or take credit for others’ work. They must acknowledge and cite all sources used in their research, seek research funding with honesty, and disclose any benefits derived from their research.

Researchers must possess a solid foundation of knowledge in their academic field and relevant experience, ensuring the research is of high quality and free from misinterpretation or harmful conclusions.

Researchers must take responsibility for their studies, including living and non-living subjects, and consider the conservation of resources, arts, and the environment in their work.

Researchers must respect the dignity and rights of individuals involved in research. They must inform participants of the research’s purpose without coercion or deception, and they must respect personal rights.

Researchers should be free to think and conduct research without bias. They must remain aware of the potential for personal or academic bias, which could distort research findings and harm the integrity of the work.

Researchers should be open to other academic opinions, willing to disclose research processes, and receptive to constructive criticism, with a commitment to improving and correcting their work.

Researchers should contribute their intellectual efforts to advancing academic knowledge and improving the prosperity and well-being of society and humankind.