Sport Management Association of Thailand (SMAT) generates Journal of Modern Sport Management (JMSM), peer-review online publication, with 2 issues per year. The aim is to publish innovative empirical, theoretical, and review articles related, but not limited to, sport management such as strategy and management; organizational behavioral and human resource management; business and international management; tourism, leisure and hospitality management; marketing; industrial relations; and education. To achieve the goal, editorial board of JMSM adopts the publication ethics for Authors, Editors, and Reviewers as follows;

Publication Ethics of Authors

1. Authors have to writing the article follows the JMSM Author Guidelines.

2. Authors have to submitting a new article and it has never been published before.

3. Authors have to follow academic integrity; such as plagiarism, fabrication, redundant publication, salami publication, and self-plagiarism.

4. Authors have to cited people or data source in their work for revealing research evidences.

5. Authors have not to consider academic benefits then neglect or violate other privacy rights or human rights.

6. Authors have to follow the authorship, which objectively and honestly indicate the contribution of each of them to the work.

7. Authors have to reported the fact and clarified all sources of financial support for the work correctly.

8. Authors have to writing the article from their own study under academic principle without bias and report the true, do not deviate results of the study or research for personal interest or harm other person, and do not extend the finding without academic confirmation.

9. Authors assume responsibility for the content of their publications and also use the work for principle and legal benefits.

10. Authors have to report the absence or presence of conflicts of interest.

11. Authors have to submitted the approval of ethical committee consideration from accredited institute if their research article had used the data from human or animals.

12. The editorial board’s decision is final.

Publication Ethics of Editors

1. When the authors submit a manuscript, editors will select and coordinate with the Reviewers who has appropriate expertise. If the Reviewers have any recommendation, the editors will coordinate with the Authors for revision and develop the manuscript.

2. Editors have to maintain confidentiality throughout the submitted manuscripts and must not divulge any information to any third party other than people relevant to the article and the process of its preparation for publication.

3. Editors take full responsibility for their manuscript acceptance through the process of evaluation and congruent with the JMSM policy.

4. Editors will not accept articles which published before.

5. Editors will make decisions based on the Reviewers’ recommendation and the accuracy from the Authors’ evidences.

6. Editors will strongly ensure the Plagiarism. If found in any process of the manuscript submitted, the Editors will terminate their decision and ask the Authors’ description for accept or reject the manuscript.

7. Editors must don’t have any conflict of interest with the Authors, Reviewers, and third party relevant.

8. The editorial board’s decision is final.

Publication Ethics of Peer Reviewers

1. Reviewers read the assigned article form the Editors for considering the value and benefit of the article, to guaranteeing the value for publication, and giving additional recommendation for quality benefit to complete the article, both format and content, for the Authors and readers impact, before return to the Editors for continue the manuscript process. However, the article will be assigned to 2 Reviewers at least for the consideration.

2. Reviewers will keep the confidential regarding to the article during the review process.

3. Reviewers must don’t have any conflict of interest with the Authors. If conflict of interest presences, Reviewers must report to the Editors and reject the evaluation.

4. Reviewers must review the article in their expertise with reliable evidences.

5. Reviewers take a responsibility for examining the redundant publication of the articles. Reviewers must report the occurred redundant publication to the Editors.

6. Reviewers have 4 alternative results of their reviews; 1) Accept with no revision, 2) Accept with revision and do not submit the revision to the Reviewers, 3) Accept with revision and submit the revision to the Reviewers, and 4) Reject.

7. The editorial board’s decision is final.