Tourism Academic Journal invites the authors to fulfill the following ethical conditions by believing in the contribution of developing a consistent and reputable information network. The journal pays attention to the instruction of the Higher Education Association Scientific Research and Publication Ethic, the suggestions of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and the international standards for the authors and the reviewers that are suggested by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) . The job descriptions for the editors, the authors, and the reviewers have been prepared by following COPE (Code of Conduct for Journal Editors) and Elsevier Guidelines for Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.
Duties of Editors
Publication Decisions
The Editor in Chief is responsible for the manuscripts to decide which one(s) will be published. Validation and importance for the researchers and audience of the manuscript are sources for the decision. The Editor in Chief may discuss with the other editors or reviewer before making a decision.
Peer Review
The Editor in Chief makes the evaluation process fair, objective, and on time. The research articles are reviewed by min. two independent reviewers from outside of the journal. The Editor in Chief may ask additional opinions if necessary. The Editor in Chief selects the experts in the field and avoids of selection of fraudulent and prejudicial reviewers.
Fair Play
The Editor in Chief evaluate the submissions in terms of intelletual content and regardless of author(s)’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious, ethnicity, citizenship or political view.
Confidentiality
Editor in Chief protects the confidentiality of the materials and the communications with the reviewers unless indicated otherwise. The Editor in Chief keeps the identity of the reviewers unless the reviewers accept to reveal their identity. The materials published in the research articles cannot be used by Editor in Chief without the auhtor(s)’ written permission. The information and opinions obtain during the review process keep in secret and are not used for personal advantage.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Editor in Chief must avoid to evaluate the submissions that contain conflicts from personal relationships.
The Responsibilities of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer-review helps the Editor in Chief to make editorial decisions and may help the author(s) to improve the paper via editorial communications. Peer-review is placed in the center of the scientific management. The reviewers are asked to treat the author(s) and their papers as they want to be treated and to behave decorous. The reviewer who thinks him or herself is not qualified enough to review the submission or not possible to review it on time, has to inform the Editor in Chief and decline to be involved the review process.
Confidentiality.
The all documents to be reviewed should be considered as top secret. The reviewers should not share the submission and the review with other people without the Editor in Chief’s permission or not communicate with the author(s) directly. The information and opinions obtain during the review process keep in secret and are not used for personal advantage.
Alertness to Ethical Issues.
The reviewer must be awake for the possible ethical issues and inform the Editor in Chief the mportant similarities with other research articles.
Standards of Objectivity
The reviews must be performed fair-and-square. The reviewers provide their opinions with supportive arguments.
Duties of Authors
Reporting Standards
The author(s) must provide a correct explanation of the study as well as an objective discussion of the importance. The data should be presented correctly. Fraudulent and intentional misrepresentations are unethical behaviors and are not acceptable.
Data Access and Retention.
The author(s) may be asked to provide the research data an / or obey the journal’s open data neccessities. They must be ready to provide the data for public access and be prepared to keep the data for acceptable duration after the publication.
Originality and Acknowledgement of Sources
The author(s) must be sure that they submit original papers and cite properly for other researchers’ studies or get necessary permissions. The author(s) must avoid from every types of plagiarism.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication.
Submitting the paper to different journals at the same time is an unethical behavior and is not acceptable. Generally, the author(s) should not submit a study that was published elsewhere except for an abstract of a course or dissertation to another journal.
Authorship of the Paper
The authorship must be limited with the people who contributed to the concept, design, perform or explication of the study. Everyone who significantly contributed to the study must be listed as co-authors. The authors take the collective responsibility of the study. Each author is responsible to research and resolve of the all questions related to a part or whole of the study.
Declaration of Competing Interests
The role of all the financial sources and the supporter if exists in the study must be explained. Also, potential conflicts must be revealed as soon as possible.
Notification of Fundamental Errors
When the author finds an important mistake on the published paper, he/she immediately should inform the Editor in Chief or the publisher. It is the author’s responsibility to collaborate with the Editor in Chief to withdraw or revise the paper based on the Editor in Chief’s decision
Changes to Authorship
It is not acceptable to make change on the authorship list unless providing a clear explanation to the Editor in Chief. If any change is necessary, a clear explanation and written approval must be provided to the Editor in Chief.
Tourism Academic Journal wants to particularly remind the following issues to the author(s):
• Plagiarism, slicing, dublication, fabrication, ignoring the supports are among the unacceptable practices within the ethical framework. All the authors must be sensitive about these issues.
• The study should not be under review process of another journal.
• The study should not be published in elsewhere.
• The authors must avoid conflicts of interest among themselves.
• The submission should not contain information about the author(s).
• Tourism Academic Journal applies blind-review process. The authors must respect the confidentiality of the review process and must not reveal themselves to the reviewers.
• The responsibility of all the materials that are in the submission belongs to the authors.
ETHICS COMMITTEE APPROVAL
Studies that require the approval of the Ethics Committee are as follows.
• All kinds of research conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from the participants by using survey, interview, focus group work, observation, experiment, interview techniques,
• The use of humans and animals (including material/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes,
• Clinical studies on humans,
• Research on animals,
• Retrospective studies in accordance with the law on the protection of personal data,
Moreover;
• In case reports, it should be stated that an “informed consent form” was obtained,
• Obtaining and specifying permission from the owners for the use of scales, questionnaires, photographs belonging to others,
• Indication of compliance with copyright regulations for the intellectual and artistic works used,
• Retrospective ethics committee approval is not required for articles whose research data were analyzed before 2020, produced from postgraduate/doctoral studies (must be specified in the article), submitted an application for publication to the journal in the previous year, accepted but not yet published.
• Whether ethics committee permission and/or legal/special permission is required for articles to be published in journals should be stated in the article. If it is necessary to obtain these permissions, it should be clearly presented from which institution, on what date and with what decision or number number.
Corrections and Post-Publication Changes
Aim
The "Corrections and Post-Publication Changes" section of the Tourism Academic Journal has been established to transparently address errors or issues in published articles and to keep readers informed. This section aims to correct inaccurate or incomplete information in the literature and to ensure the integrity of the scientific record, in accordance with the ethical standards established by COPE.
Scope
Corrections or post-publication changes are made in the following cases:
• If the study contains a significant error or misleading information (e.g., calculation error, experimental error, data fabrication, or image manipulation),
• If the study involves ethical violations such as plagiarism or unauthorized use of data,
• If the author(s) failed to disclose a conflict of interest that could potentially affect the interpretation of the findings,
Principles
Correction Notice: Corrections include a clear and transparent explanation, along with the title of the article and author information. The correction specifies which part of the study is unreliable and provides the reason for the correction.
Timeliness of Publication: Corrections and retractions are published as promptly as possible to prevent the continued dissemination of incorrect or misleading information and to uphold the integrity of the scientific record.
Accessibility and Transparency: Correction notices and retraction statements are made permanently accessible to all readers without any access restrictions, ensuring transparency and accountability in the scholarly record.
Use of Neutral Language: Correction statements are written in an objective and neutral tone, adhering to ethical publishing standards, and avoiding speculative or inflammatory language.
Corrigenda (For Author Errors)
Corrigenda are corrections published to address errors identified by the author(s) that need to be rectified to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. These errors, however, do not affect the main findings or conclusions of the study.
When Are Corrigenda Published?
• Errors in metadata, such as inaccuracies in the article title, author names, or institutional affiliations.
• Incorrect captions, labels, or descriptions associated with tables, figures, or charts.
• Misused terminology, ambiguous phrasing, or omitted essential information that does not alter the study’s main findings or conclusions.
Correction Process:
• The error identified by the author(s) is reported to the editor.
• The editor reviews the reported error and evaluates its appropriateness for correction.
• The prepared correction is published and linked to the original article.
• The correction is connected to all versions of the original article and is made accessible to readers.
Errata (For Production Error)
Errata are published to correct editorial errors introduced during the publication process. These errors fall outside the responsibility of the author(s) and are addressed to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record
When Are Errata Published?
• Errors in the article title.
• Incorrect or incomplete entry of author names.
• Misplacement, incorrect formatting, or errors in the arrangement of tables or figures.
• Omission or incorrect addition of content during the publication process.
Correction Process:
• The error, identified by the editor, readers, or author(s), is reviewed and assessed.
• The editor is responsible for preparing the correction notice.
• The correction is published and linked to the original article.
• The correction must be freely accessible and openly available to all readers.
The Tourism Academic Journal publishes corrections only in cases of significant errors resulting from author errors (Corrigenda) or production error (Errata).
In the event of a serious complaint regarding the journal's own procedures, the responsible editor will communicate with the relevant author and the concerned members of the Editorial Board to address the issue.
Retraction
Th Tourism Academic Journal is a publication fully committed to adhering to the internationally recognized principles of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), aiming to preserve the accuracy and integrity of scientific records. In cases where issues such as data fabrication, plagiarism, duplicate publication, errors in authorship order, inadequate disclosure of conflicts of interest, ethical violations during the peer review process, or insufficient evidence supporting the findings of a published study are identified, a retraction process may be initiated. The retraction process consists of several stages, including the reporting of a suspicion, the editor's evaluation, obtaining independent expert opinions, and reaching a final decision. The retraction decision is made by the editor after evaluating all the evidence. Authors have the right to appeal the retraction decision. Appeals are carefully reviewed by the editor. Retracted articles are appropriately marked on the journal's website and within the relevant indexing databases.
Initiation of Retraction:
A retraction process may be initiated under the following circumstances:
• By the authors, when they identify significant errors or breaches in their work that compromise its integrity or reliability.
• By the editor, based on identified concerns such as data fabrication, plagiarism, duplicate publication, errors in authorship order, inadequate disclosure of conflicts of interest, ethical violations during the peer review process, or insufficient evidence supporting the findings of a published study.
• By readers or third parties who provide credible evidence of issues affecting the validity of the work.
Scope of the Retraction Process: Articles published in the journal may be retracted under the following circumstances:
• Significant inconsistencies in research data or deficiencies in experimental protocols.
• Cases where data integrity has been deliberately violated (e.g., falsification of visual materials).
• When plagiarism is detected.
• In cases where content replicating a previously published work is published.
• In cases of ethical approval violations or breaches of copyright law.
• In cases where the publication process violates the principles of scientific publishing (e.g., conflicts of interest during the peer review process or the use of misleading information).
• In cases where the failure of researchers to fulfill their obligation to disclose conflicts of interest undermines the credibility of the research.
Retraction Notice
• The article retracted due to a breach of scientific ethical principles will be clearly marked in all digital archives and relevant databases with a detailed retraction notice stating the reasons for the retraction. Furthermore, it will no longer be considered a credible reference within the scientific literature.
• The title of the retracted article, author information, date of retraction, and the reason for retraction will be clearly stated and permanently recorded across all relevant publishing platforms and databases.
• The retraction decision will be promptly announced across all relevant databases and online platforms, ensuring it is visible to anyone with access to the article.
• The notice will be prepared in a clear, concise, and neutral language to inform all relevant parties.
Our journal aims to provide a reliable and ethically grounded scientific resource in the field of tourism, fostering trust among researchers and the academic community.
Publication Policy
1. Tourism Academic Journal is a peer-reviewed journal and published one time in six months.This journal uses double-blind review.
2. The manuscripts submitted to the Tourism Academic Journal should not be published or submitted to elsewhere.
3. The manuscripts that are sent to the Tourism Academic Journal are subject to editorial checks in terms of form and content. They are sent to the reviewers, if appropriate.
4. The journal is tourism-focused and interdisciplinary. The main purpose of the journal is to publish papers that contribute to the tourism discipline theoretically and practically, were prepared within the framework of the neutrality principle, depend on science ethics and are solution-oriented.
5. The duration of a manuscript reviewing is 45 days on average.
The requested revisions must be performed based on the following instructions:
• Two separate files for the revisions must be prepared for manuscript and revision form. Both files should not contain author(s)’ information.
• The files must be named as “manuscript” and “revision form”.
• It should be explained how the revisions were performed on the form. The requested revision that is not possible to be applied should be explained in a valid and appropriate way.
• Page, paragraph, and line numbers of the revisions must be provided on the form.
• Revised parts must be written in red color on the text.
6. The authors must communicate with the Editor in Chief when they find a mistake. They should collaborate for revision or withdraw of the manuscript.
December 20, 2025
Page
201-216
