Research Journal Rajamangala University of Technology Thanyaburi (RJ-RMUTT) is a research journal that understands the importance of ethics in articles publication. Therefore, parties involved in the publication process of RJ-RMUTT should follow the guidelines of “The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

$\bullet$Duties and responsibilities of Editors

- proceed to meet the wishes of readers and authors

- strive to constantly improve their journal

- ensure the quality of the published research

- provide the right to freedom of opinion and expression

- maintain the accuracy of the academic record

- preclude business needs from compromising intellectual standards

- willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed

$\circ$ Editor's duties to readers

- readers must be informed about who has funded research and on the role of the funders in the research

$\circ$ Editor's duties to author

- Editors must take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of the article they publish, recognizing that journals and sections within journals will have different aims and standards.

- Editors’ decisions to accept or reject an article for publication should be based only on the article’s importance, originality, and clarity, and the study’s relevance to the remit of the journal.

- Explanation of peer review processes should be published, and Editors must be ready to justify any important deviation from the described processes.

- Journals have a declared mechanism for authors to appeal against Editorial decisions.

- Editors must publish guidance to authors on everything that is expected of them. This guidance should be regularly updated.

- Editors must not reverse decisions to accept or publish submissions except serious problems are identified with the submission.

- New Editors must not overturn decisions to publish submissions made by the previous Editor except serious problems are identified.

$\circ$ Editor's duties to reviewers

- Editors must publish guidance to reviewers on everything that is expected of them. The editors must not disclose the identity of the reviewers to the authors and vice versa. The Information or comments from reviewers must be kept confidential.

$\circ$ The peer-review process

- Editors should have systems to ensure that article submitted to their journal remains confidential while under review process.

$\circ$ Complaints

- Editors must respond promptly to complaints and should ensure there is a way for dissatisfied complainants to take complaints further. This process should be made clear in the journal and should include information on how to refer unresolved matters to COPE.

$\circ$ Encouraging debate

- Cogent criticisms of published work should be published except Editors have convincing reasons why they cannot be. Authors of criticized material should be received the opportunity to respond.

- Studies that previous published in the journal should be given an especially sympathetic hearing. The studies reporting negative results should not be excluded.

$\circ$ Encouraging academic integrity

- Editors must ensure that research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.

- Editors should seek assurances that all research has been approved by an appropriate agency (e.g. research ethics committee, institutional review board). However, Editors must be recognized that such approval does not guarantee that the research is ethical.

$\circ$ Protecting individual data

- Editors should protect the confidentiality of individual information. (It is therefore almost always necessary to obtain written informed consent from patients described in case reports and for photographs of patients)

$\circ$ Pursuing misconduct

- Editors have a role to act if they suspect misconduct. This role extends to both published and unpublished papers.

- Editors should not simply reject articles that raise concerns about possible misconduct. Editors are ethically obliged to pursue alleged cases.

- Editors should first seek a response from those accused. If Editors are not satisfied with the response, should ask the relevant employers or some appropriate body to investigate.

- Editors should make all reasonable efforts to ensure that a proper investigation is conducted; if this does not happen, Editors should make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.

$\circ$ Ensuring the integrity of the academic record

- When it is found that a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distorted report has been published, it must be corrected promptly and with due prominence.

- If, after a reasonable investigation, an item proves to be deceitful, it should be retracted. The retraction should be clearly identifiable to readers and indexing systems.

$\circ$ Relations with journal owners and publishers.

- The relationship of Editors to publishers and owners is often complex but should in each case be based tightly on the principle of Editorial independence. Despite the economic and political realities of their journals, Editors must make decisions on which articles to publish based on quality and suitability for readers rather than for immediate financial or political gain.

$\circ$ Commercial considerations

- Editors should have declared policies on advertising in relation to the content of the journal.

- Editors must misleading advertisements must be refused, and Editors must be willing to publish criticisms, according to the same criteria used for material in the rest of the journal.

- Reprints should be published as they appear in the journal must keep the original appearance unless a correction is to be added.

$\circ$ Conflict of interest

- Editors should have to manage their own conflicts of interest as well as those of their staff, authors, reviewers and Editorial board.

$\bullet$ Duties and responsibilities of Authors

- A manuscript must not be published in any journal before submission to RJ-RMUTT. Authors can submit the manuscript to other journals only after the manuscript has been declined by RJ-RMUTT.

- Authors are accountable for any scientific mistakes and arguments as well as plagiarism.

- It is the duty of the author to respond to all the comments and suggestions of the reviewers. If authors do not agree with any comments of a reviewer, the authors should provide an explanation.

$\bullet$ Duties and responsibilities of Reviewers

- Reviewers should decline the review request provided the manuscript’s research area is not within their expertise.

- Reviewers must give comments and opinions based solely on their expertise and without any conflicts of interest.

- Reviewers must not disclose information or results from any manuscript before publication.

(reference: https://www.publicationethics.org/files/2008%20Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf)