Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

The Regional Tourism: Policy and Practice for Central Asia journal follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and relevance of published articles. The peer review process is designed to maintain the journal's high standards and ethical integrity.

Step-by-Step Peer Review Process

  1. Initial Screening:

    • Upon submission, the editorial team conducts an initial check to ensure the manuscript aligns with the journal's focus and scope and adheres to submission guidelines.
    • The manuscript is also checked for plagiarism using reliable detection software (e.g., Turnitin, iThenticate). Manuscripts with significant overlap will be rejected outright.

  2. Reviewer Assignment:

    • Manuscripts passing the initial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field.
    • The double-blind review process ensures that the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential.

  3. Review Criteria:
    Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

    • Relevance: Alignment with the journal’s scope and current trends in regional tourism.
    • Originality: Novelty and contribution to the field of tourism policy and practice.
    • Methodology: Soundness of research design, data collection, and analysis.
    • Clarity: Organization, readability, and coherence of arguments.
    • Impact: Significance of findings for tourism development in Central Asia and beyond.

  4. Reviewer Recommendations:
    After evaluation, reviewers provide one of the following recommendations:

    • Accept: The manuscript is ready for publication with minor or no revisions.
    • Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires small adjustments before acceptance.
    • Major Revisions: Substantial revisions are necessary, and the manuscript must be re-evaluated.
    • Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards or scope.

  5. Editorial Decision:

    • The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with Associate Editors, reviews the feedback from reviewers to make a final decision.
    • The decision is communicated to the authors along with detailed reviewer comments.

  6. Revision Process:

    • Authors are provided with reviewer comments and are given a specific timeframe (e.g., 2–4 weeks) to submit a revised manuscript.
    • Revised submissions may be sent for further review if deemed necessary.

  7. Final Acceptance and Publication:

    • Once the manuscript is approved, it undergoes copyediting, formatting, and proofreading before publication in the upcoming issue.