Peer-review Policy

All the articles submitted to Journal of Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality (TOLEHO) were subjected to double-blind peer-reviewing process. Journal of TOLEHO has a strict reviewing policy. In our reviewing model, both reviewer(s) and author(s) are anonymous and it is the journal’s priority to conceal authors’ identities. However, it should not be forgotten that reviewers can often identify the author(s) of the reviewed papers through their writing style, subject matter of the manuscript or self-citations in the manuscript etc. Therefore, it has been becoming exceedingly difficult for the journal to guarantee total author anonymity. The reviewing process starts with the submission of the manuscript. One of the associate editors handles the submitted manuscript for a preliminary examination. Three possible decisions could be made about the submitted manuscript following this stage:

  1. Desk reject: If the study is found not to have met the journal requirements in terms of content, an immediate desk reject decision is made.
  2. Technical revision: If the study is found not to have been prepared according to the author guidelines of the journal, it is sent back to the author for technical revision.
  3. Editorial decision: If the study meets the journal requirements in terms of content and is found to have been prepared following the author’s guidelines, it is submitted to the editor-in-chief for final approval.

Please note that Journal of TOLEHO has a very strict policy for plagiarism screening. For this purpose, the journal is using Turnitin similarity reports. Manuscripts with a similarity rate of 25% or more in default setting, will directly be rejected.

After the editor’s approval, one of the associate editors is appointed as the handling editor during the peer-reviewing process. At this stage, two reviewers are appointed to evaluate the study. There are five possible decisions in this round of peer-reviewing;

  1. Accept: Manuscript is found to be appropriate to be published without any revision as it is.
  2. Minor Revision: Manuscript is accepted despite some minor revisions addressed by the reviewer. Handling editor also checks the revisions made by the author(s) following the submission of the feedbacks.
  3. Major Revision: Manuscript is accepted despite some major revisions addressed by the reviewer. Reviewer, himself or herself, checks the revisions made by the author(s) following the submission of the feedbacks. This needs to be finalized in a maximum of 3 rounds.
  4. Re-submit: Manuscript is not accepted for publication, but the author(s) are encouraged to resubmit after making necessary revisions in their manuscript.
  5. Reject: Manuscript is not accepted for publication, and author(s) are not encouraged to re-submit the rejected manuscript.

At the end of the peer-reviewing process, the final decision as to whether the manuscript will be published or not belongs to the editor-in-chief. The manuscripts that are decided to be published are submitted to the preparation unit for publication. If necessary, additional technical revisions can be requested on the text, bibliography, images, tables, figures, etc.