Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics
Introduction
  Journal of Computer and Creative Technology (วารสารคอมพิวเตอร์และเทคโนโลยีสร้างสรรค์) The journal has established publishing ethics in line with the ethical standards of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the announcement of the Thai-Journal Citation Index Center, regarding the evaluation of the ethics and principal ethics in Thai academic journals. The announcement was published on July 14th, 2023. Moreover, the updates regarding the evaluation of the ethics and principal ethics in Thai academic journals will be announced on February 17th, 2025. Thus, the publishing ethics of this journal include the ethics of the editors, the ethics of the reviewer, and the ethics of the author, with details as follows:

Ethics of the editors
    The editors include the Editor-in-Chief, Section Editor, and Editorial Board, who have roles as follows.
      1. Do the journal based on the standards according to the Thai-Journal Citation Index Center (TCI) criteria.
      2. Set policies and objectives for article publication, announce publication fee, do the instructions for authors, an article template, international standard citation format, and publication via the website.
      3. Consider preliminary articles according to the journal's scope, correct writing follows the format, and references are to avoid the operations of conflict of interest.
      4. Check the article for duplication, similarities, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or incorrect citations, and please consider rejecting the problem article immediately.
      5. If any article has been published, but there is a report of an ethical violation in item 4. The editorial team should consider removing the article from the journal and resolve the issue. The articles must be removed by using the watermark for all pages with the text of “Retracted”.
      6. Evaluate the quality of articles before publication by selecting experts who have no conflict of interest with the article.
      7. Follow up on the quality assessment of the article by the reviewers within the schedule.
      8. Assign a section editor from the editorial board to supervise and monitor the evaluation process of each article's quality in a transparent and verifiable manner. The section editor must monitor the evaluation process of each article's quality and consider screening, recruiting, selecting, and sending articles to the reviewers that match the subject area. The section editor should give suggestions for improving the quality of the article and provide recommendations for decisions regarding the quality of articles to the editor-in-chief.
      9. The editor-in-chief has to decide the quality of articles from the results of the assessment are as follows:
            9.1 Accepted for publication after passing three reviewers; any reviewer requests to resubmit the article for reviewing. The article has to be sent back to the reviewer before the results of the consideration are decided. The publication article has to be accepted by at least two out of three reviewers.
            9.2 Rejected for the article after passing three reviewers; at least two reviewers have to reject it for publication. The journal has to notify the author with empirical evidence. If the author has evidence to dispute the evaluation results, the editor-in-chief should bring the evidence into the consideration process together with the editorial board. Then report the results of the consideration to the author and that the decision of the editorial board is the end.
      10. Do an acceptance letter after an editor's decision (Accept Submission) for the article is recorded.
      11. Assign the editor-in-chief as the final editor to check articles before publishing via the ThaiJo system, then make the journal wholly published.
      12. Do the journal to be published strictly according to the journal's publication schedule.

Ethics of the reviewers
      1. Consider selecting and evaluating articles that are unrelated to yourself or have a vested interest or conflicts of interest. Consider evaluating articles that align with their field of study or have expertise in the article content. Consider the evaluation schedule to evaluate articles and submit evaluation results within the schedule.
      2. Check the article for duplication, similarities, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or incorrect citations, and please consider rejecting the problem article immediately.
      3. Evaluate academic and research articles' quality according to academic principles. Check the format and provide valuable suggestions for authors and readers.
      4. Evaluate articles and submit evaluation results within the schedule.
      5. The decision on the article quality assessment is as follows: 1) Accepted the article for publication without editing (Accept Submission). 2) Edit the article, then send it to the editor-in-chief for decision (Revisions Required). 3) Edit the article, and then send back to asked reviewer (Resubmit for Review). 4) Rejecting article publication (Decline Submission)
      6. If the result is resubmission for review, the reviewer must re-evaluate in a new round and submit evaluation results within the schedule.

Ethics of the authors
      1. Consider the scope of the journal, an article template, correct citation format, and instructions for authors.
      2. Do not write an article with duplication, similarities, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and correct citation.
      3. If the article has content created from an Artificial Intelligence (AI) system, please give a footnote in the article.
      4. The submitted article must not be under consideration by other journals or academic conferences. Must not have previously published any part or full article in a journal or proceeding from an academic conference (except collectting only abstracts).
      5. Article submission has to be by the journal editorial process. The article has to be tracked through the ThaiJo system and email address until the journal editorial process is complete.
      6. In the case of decision argumentation of the article result. The author must be clearly explained to the editor-in-chief along with supporting evidence and information for the editorial board to consider the results again.

Note: Translated and updated information from Committee on Publication Ethics (https://publicationethics.org) and Thai-Journal Citation Index (TCI) Centre (https://tci-thailand.org)
Updated: February 23rd, 2025