Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

The editorial board of the academic journal of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Prince of Songkla University, has established publication ethics for editors, reviewers, and authors to ensure that the integrity and validity of the published research are maintained. The responsibility of all involved parties in the review process are as follows:


  1. The author(s) must certify that the article submitted for publication is an original contribution and has not been previously published, nor is it under consideration by any journal. If the editorial board discovers such instances, the paper will be withdrawn from consideration.
  2. The author(s) shall not commit any degree of plagiarism. If the editorial board finds such infringement, the right to publication in the Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, Prince of Songkla University will be revoked.
  3. The author(s) are required to correct or rework their paper in due time as assessed and advised by reviewers and the editorial board.
  4. The author(s) must acknowledge the source(s) of research funding (if any) in the acknowledgments section. ข้อนี้ของภาษาไทยพิมพ์ผิดอยู่ค่ะ -ผู้เขียนจะต้องระบุส่วนอืต่างๆ-
  5. The author(s) whose name(s) are listed in the paper shall contribute to paper production or research-related procedures.
  6. The author must not plagiarize the work of others. The paper detected as bearing plagiarism must be frozen for further evaluation. ข้อ 6 พูดเรื่อง plagiarism ซ้ำกับข้อ 2 ควรตัดออก พร้อมตัดข้อความภาษาไทยออกด้วยค่ะ หากคงไว้ก็ใช้ข้อความนี้ได้เลยค่ะ
  7. If the author(s) use information from other sources, whether it be text, images, tables, etc., they must cite the sources correctly according to academic standards to avoid any accusations of plagiarism or infringement on the copyright of others' work.
  8. The author(s) are required to format the paper according to the guidelines provided by the journal.
  9. The author(s) should refrain from pressuring the editorial board to expedite the review process. If authors engage in such behavior, the journal reserves the right to reject the paper.
  10. The author is prohibited from attempting to identify the reviewers of their paper. The review process is double-blind, meaning that this information is not disclosed. The outcome of the evaluation by the reviewers and the editorial board of the journal is to be accepted by the authors.
  11. The author(s) shall disclose any potential conflicts of interest.


  1. Editors and the editorial board are responsible for evaluating submitted papers to ensure their alignment with the scope of the journal before proceeding to the next stage of the process.
  2. Editors should actively supervise, review, and evaluate peer review practices to ensure their alignment with the scope and objectives of the journal. ข้อความภาษาไทยตกคำว่า -มี- ค่ะ “...ต้องความกระตือรือร้นในการติดตาม...”
  3. Editors and the editorial board have complete responsibility and authority to reject or accept the paper.
  4. Editors and the editorial board check, review, and reject any papers that have been published or are under consideration for publication by another journal.
  5. The editors and editorial board will consider and verify contents if the paper has been revised according to the suggestions and comments of the reviewers.
  6. The editors and editorial board will consider a paper without bias and should also be careful not to reveal the identities of authors or reviewers.
  7. The editors and editorial board are committed to maintaining and improving the journal's quality and reputation.
  8. The editors will issue an acceptance upon completion of the review process.
  9. The editor must bear no conflict of interest at any stage of the peer review process.


  1. The reviewers will consider all papers based on academic principles without bias.
  2. The reviewers should evaluate the paper that fits with their area of expertise.
  3. The reviewers must strictly evaluate the paper according to the journal’s criteria or guidelines.
  4. The reviewers must not have any conflict of interest with any of the author(s), or any individual involved in the process. 
  5. The reviewers must not inquire about the identity of the authors, as the review process is double-blind.
  6. Throughout peer review, the reviewers should demonstrate responsiveness and provide a report for the evaluation of a revised article within the allotted time.
  7. In case the plagiarism is detected, the reviewer must notify the editor at once.