Publication Ethics
Publication Ethics
Publication Ethics Statement:
International Journal Of Tourism Business Research (INTOUR) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. The Editorial Board is responsible for, among others, preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behavior is unacceptable, and the International Journal Of Tourism Business Research does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors who submitted articles: affirm that manuscript contents are original. Furthermore, the authors’ submission also implies that the manuscript has not been published previously in any language, either wholly or partly, and is not currently submitted for publication elsewhere. Editors, authors, and reviewers, within the International Journal Of Tourism Business Research, are to be fully committed to good publication practice and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. As part of the Core Practices, COPE has written guidelines on the https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines.
Section A: Publication and authorship
1. All submissions to JInternational Journal Of Tourism Business Research must be original and free of unethicalpractices.
2. Unethical practices include plagiarism, data falsification, data fabrication, paper slicing, paper written by someone else for the authors, and other practices that violate the generally accepted research ethics principles.
3. The Editor-in-chief is responsible for investigating all alleged unethical practices.
4. In case of an alleged unethical practice, the Editor-in-chief informs the authors of the manuscript, provides the necessary evidence and invites the authors to provide explanation.
5. Concerns about unethical practices can be expressed by the Editor-in-chief, the associate editors, Advisory and Editorial board members, manuscript reviewers, authors, readers and other people who have encountered such practices.
6. All submissions to the INTOUR are checked for presence of unethical practices with Turnitin or other software package before being sent to reviewers.
7. If an unethical practice is identified during the review process, the review process is stopped until the case is clarified. The review process continues if the alleged unethical practice is not substantiated.
8. If an alleged unethical practice is substantiated for a manuscript that has not been yet sent for review, is currently under review or has been accepted but not published yet, the manuscript is rejected.
9. If an alleged unethical practice is substantiated for a manuscript that has already been published, the manuscript is retracted and a retraction notice is published in the next available volume of the journal. For completeness of the bibliographic records, the text of the retracted paper remains online, but with a watermark “Retracted”.
10. In case of a second substantiated unethical practice, the author receives a life-time ban for publication it the INTOUR.
11. The review process is double-blind peer-review.
12. The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
13. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
14. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
15. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
16. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
17. No research can be included in more than one publication.
18. The INTOUR adheres to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (https://publicationethics.org/)
Section B: Authors’ responsibilities
1. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
2. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
3. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
4. The authors must participate in the peer-review process.
5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
6. All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
7. The authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
8. The authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
9. The authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
10. Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.
Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities
1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
5. Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
6. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Section D: Editors’ responsibilities
1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
3. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
4. Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
6. Editors should have a clear picture of research funding sources.
7. Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to publication’s scope.
8. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
9. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
10. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
12. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
14. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.
