Publication Ethics
          The editorial board shall appoint qualified individuals to assess the quality of articles. Each article shall be evaluated by three experts who have expertise directly related to the content of the article and who have no conflicts of interest with the authors. This process shall follow a double-blind peer review format, wherein the reviewers are unaware of the authors' identities, and vice versa.
          The evaluation results are categorized into four types:
          1) Recommended for publication without revisions.
          2) Requires revisions before publication (assigned for further consideration by the editorial team).
          3) Requires revisions before publication (to be resubmitted for reconsideration).
          4) Not recommended for publication.
          Thus, to ensure accurate scholarly communication and compliance with international publishing standards, ethical principles for disseminating research work have been established for all stakeholders involved in journal operations. These principles mandate strict adherence to ethical guidelines and standards in publishing practices, as follows:

1. Ethical Guidelines for Authors
          1.1) Submitted articles must align with the objectives and scope of the journal. Failure to comply with the journal's guidelines may result in rejection.
          1.2) Authors' work must be original and not previously published elsewhere.
          1.3) Authors must properly cite the works of others. Any text borrowed from other sources must be appropriately referenced in the manuscript.
          1.4) Articles must be written in accordance with the formatting guidelines specified by the journal.
          1.5) Authors must certify the accuracy and authenticity of their submitted articles and confirm the actual contributions of all listed authors.
          1.6) Authors must not plagiarize the work of others and should provide citations whenever referencing or presenting others' work in their own manuscripts.
          1.7) Authors are required to meticulously address the suggestions provided by peer reviewers to enhance the quality and academic standards of the article. Failure to revise adequately may lead to rejection. In cases where revisions are not made according to reviewer suggestions, authors may provide explanations and rationale for their decisions to the journal.
          1.8) Authors must ensure the accuracy and consistency of the reference list in the manuscript. They should not include references in the reference section that are not cited in the main body of the article, and web sources should only be cited when absolutely necessary.
          1.9) For research articles involving human subjects, authors must include a statement of approval from the institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee, along with the certification number, in the "Methods" section of the article. Authors must also report any facts resulting from the research, ensuring transparency, accuracy, and truthfulness without concealment, fabrication, or misrepresentation of data.

2. Ethical Guidelines for the Editorial Team
          2.1) The editorial team is responsible for evaluating and reviewing submitted articles for consideration in the journal, ensuring alignment with the journal's objectives and scope. This includes assessing the quality of articles during the evaluation process and before publication.
          2.2) The editorial team must base their evaluations of articles solely on academic merit, without bias towards the content or authors based on race, gender, religion, culture, politics, or affiliations.
          2.3) The editorial team must not have any conflicts of interest with the authors or reviewers. They must not utilize articles or journals for commercial purposes or claim them as their own scholarly work.
          2.4) The editorial team must not alter or change the content of articles or the evaluations provided by qualified reviewers. This includes refraining from censoring or inserting information exchanged between reviewers and authors.
          2.5) The editorial team must adhere strictly to the processes and procedures of the journal.
          2.6) Maintain the standards of the journal by publishing on time, as well as continually improving and ensuring the quality and relevance of the journal.
          2.7) Implement a rigorous plagiarism detection system for submitted articles using reliable and widely accepted software in academia. The journal utilizes the Copy Catch program of the ThaiJO system, with a maximum allowable similarity of 15%.
          2.8) Monitor the collection of page charges as specified by the journal, ensuring transparency and accountability in the process.

3. Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers
          3.1) Reviewers must prioritize the quality of the manuscript in their evaluation, based on academic principles and reasoning, free from bias or personal opinions, and without conflicts of interest with the authors.
          3.2) Reviewers must not seek benefits from the scholarly work they evaluate.
          3.3) Reviewers must be aware of their own knowledge and understanding of the content of the scholarly work being evaluated.
          3.4) If reviewers identify that the manuscript under review is a duplicate of other works, they must promptly inform the editorial team.
          3.5) Reviewers must adhere to the timeframe for evaluation as specified, and not disclose any information about the manuscript to unauthorized individuals.
          3.6) Reviewers must not disclose any information about the manuscript or the authors to unrelated individuals during the evaluation period.
          3.7) The evaluation results are the exclusive privilege of the journal's editorial team.
          3.8) Reviewers may suggest relevant and up-to-date references for authors to consider incorporating into their manuscript for further improvement.