Journal of Responsible Tourism Management (JRTM) is committed to the highest academic, professional, legal, and ethical standards in publishing work in this journal. To this end, we have adopted a set of guidelines, to which all submitting authors are expected to adhere, to assure integrity and ethical publishing for authors, reviewers, and editors.
In the submission process to JRTM, authors must compliance with following set of guidelines:
1: Peer review process
All of a journal’s content, apart from any editorial material that is clearly marked as such, shall be subject to peer-review. Peer review is defined as obtaining advice on individual manuscripts from reviewers, expert in the field. This process, as well as any policies related to the journal’s peer review procedures, are clearly described on the journal’s website. Therefore, all manuscripts submitted to JRTM are subject to editorial preliminary review and subsequently double-blind peer review. Double-blind review is defined as a review process wherein both the authors and the reviewers are anonymous. Peer review is defined as the evaluation of academic work by other academics of the same field.
All JRTM reviewers are appointed based on their areas of expertise. They are invited to review, and their performance is evaluated each time. Those who perform well and consistently will then be appointed as an Editorial Review Board member.
2: Authorship and contributorship
Authorship of a manuscript should be limited to authors who have made significant contributions. Every author listed on a journal article should have made a significant contribution to the work reported (in terms of research conception or design, or acquisition of data, or the analysis and interpretation of data). As an author or co-author, you share responsibility and accountability for the content of your article.
JRTM require authors to provide a contributorship statement in their manuscript. This statement lists the specific contributions of each author to the research project. Common criteria include substantial contributions to the conception, design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation of the research.
JRTM usually designate one author as the corresponding author. This author is responsible for communication with the journal, handling revisions, and responding to queries from readers. The corresponding author is not necessarily the first author and can be any co-author who assumes this role.
3: Complaints and appeals
The JRTM editorial office assesses the complaint’s validity and seriousness. Simple issues may be quickly resolved, while more complex matters could necessitate further investigation. In such cases, JRTM may consult with involved parties, examine the manuscript and review process, and potentially seek advice from experts or the editorial board. Once the investigation concludes, JRTM takes appropriate action, which may involve manuscript-related changes, process revisions, or issuing corrections or apologies as required.
Authors who believe their manuscript was unjustly rejected have the option to submit an appeal to the journal. In the appeal, authors should provide a detailed argument explaining why they believe the initial rejection was unwarranted. The editorial office, often with input from the editorial board or external experts, reviews the appeal. This review assesses the fairness of the original decision and whether any errors or misunderstandings occurred during the review process. Based on this assessment, JRTM may uphold the initial decision, reverse it, or request further revisions. The decision on the appeal is generally considered final.
Journal policies on plagiarism are essential to maintain the integrity of academic and scientific research. Plagiarism is the act of using someone else’s words, ideas, or work without proper attribution or permission. JRTM uses Turnitin to screen for unoriginal material. Authors submitting to a JRTM should be aware that their paper may be submitted to Turnitin at any point during the peer-review or production process.
Any allegations of plagiarism or self-plagiarism made to a journal will be investigated by the editor of the journal. If the allegations appear to be founded, all named authors of the paper will be contacted and an explanation of the overlapping material will be requested. JRTM considers only those manuscripts which contain less than 15% plagiarism. If any manuscript contains more than the mentioned percentage, it will be reverted back to the author for removing the plagiarism. If author does not send revised manuscript with less than 15% plagiarism, the journal will reject his/her manuscript.
5:Data sharing and reproducibility
It is essential that all data is accurate, and representative of your research. JRTM encourages authors to submit your supplemental data with your article. JRTM also encourages authors to provide detailed descriptions of their research methodology and data collection processes, making it easier for others to replicate the study. Reproducibility enhances the credibility of research findings. Cases of data fabrication/falsification will be evaluated by the editor of the journal. Authors may be contacted to provide supporting raw data where required. Journal Editorial Board members may be contacted to assist in further evaluation of the paper and allegations. If the explanation is not satisfactory, the submission will be rejected, and no future submissions may be accepted (at our discretion).
6: Conflicts of interest
It is very important to be honest about any conflicts of interest, whether sources of research funding, direct or indirect financial support, supply of equipment or materials, or other support. JRTM requires authors to declare. any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript and acknowledge individuals or organizations that have provided financial support for research. If a conflict of interest is not declared to the JRTM upon submission, or during review, and it affects the actual or potential interpretation of the results, the paper may be rejected or retracted.
7: Ethic Approval
All authors have to follow the ethical guidelines for journal publication. The authors are dutybound to obtain prior permission from the officials of the Institution/ University, where the work is to be undertaken, for conducting the experiments on animals including human and the work reported should not violate the law. Animal related experiments, prior to their execution, should be got examined and approved by the professionals (Institutional Ethical Committee) with respect to the moral aspects. Research on human beings must comply with the Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) for Experiments Involving Humans [https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for- medical-research-involving-human-subjects/]; EU Directive 2010/63/EU for Animal Experiments [http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/lab_animals/legislation_en.htm].
Human/animal details may be included only if they are essential for scientific purposes and the author(s) need to obtain written permission from the individual, parent, owners or guardian. All the manuscripts reporting the findings of experimental study involving human/animal subjects should provide a statement confirming that each subject or subject’s guardian obtains an informal consent, after the approval of experimental protocol by the ethics committee.
7: Post-publication discussions and corrections
JRTM typically provide options and mechanisms for researchers and readers to engage in these discussions and address any errors or issues that may arise after publication, such as the acceptance of commentaries, letters, or short communications from readers and researchers that discuss or critique published articles. Errata and corrections are also commonly used to rectify errors or omissions in published works, with errata addressing minor mistakes and corrections addressing more significant issues. JRTM encourages data and code sharing, post-publication peer review, and community feedback to promote transparency and facilitate post-publication discussions.
In cases where there are concerns about the validity or ethical conduct of a study, JRTM may issue editorial expressions of concern and, in the most severe cases, may retract articles containing fraudulent data or serious ethical violations. These mechanisms collectively contribute to maintaining the integrity and reliability of scientific literature and fostering open and transparent communication within the research community, ensuring that errors or issues in published research can be addressed effectively.