Ethic Statement

Jurnal Kajian Pariwisata (JKP) publishes scholarly articles related to tourism research, conceptual reviews, and policy analysis. Published articles must be original and not previously published in other media, whether print or electronic. The following statement outlines the ethical behavior expected from all parties involved in article publication in this journal, including authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers. This statement is based on the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Editorial Responsibilities:

  1. Fair Play and Editorial Independence: Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts based on academic merit (relevance, originality, study validity, clarity) and their alignment with the journal’s scope, without regard to race, gender, or institutional affiliation. Editorial decisions are not influenced by external policies.
  2. Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff maintain confidentiality regarding submitted manuscript information.
  3. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Editors will not use unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for personal gain and will recuse themselves from handling manuscripts with conflicts of interest.
  4. Publication Decisions: Editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts undergo peer review by at least two experts in the field and decide which manuscripts to publish based on the validity and relevance of the work.
  5. Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations: Editors take responsive action when ethical issues related to submitted or published papers are raised. Editors, working with the publisher and/or relevant societies, will address any ethical concerns related to submitted manuscripts or published papers. Any reported unethical publishing behavior will be investigated, even if identified years after publication. AP-SMART editors adhere to the COPE Flowcharts when handling suspected misconduct cases. If an ethical concern is substantiated, the journal will issue a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or another relevant note.

    Reviewers' Duties

    1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review aids editors in making decisions and may help authors enhance their manuscripts through feedback. It is a crucial element of scholarly communication and central to scientific research. AP-SMART believes that all scholars should contribute fairly to the peer review process.

    2. Promptness: Referees who feel unqualified to review a manuscript or who cannot review promptly should notify the editors immediately and decline the review invitation so that alternative reviewers can be found.

    3. Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review are confidential and must not be shared or discussed with others unless authorized by the Editor-in-Chief, who will do so only under exceptional circumstances. This confidentiality also applies to reviewers who decline the review invitation.

    4. Objectivity: Reviews should be objective and provide clear observations with supporting arguments to help authors improve their manuscripts. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.

    5. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should identify any relevant published work not cited by the authors and ensure that observations, derivations, or arguments from previous publications are properly cited. They should also alert the editors to any significant similarities or overlaps between the manuscript and other works they know.

    6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Referees must declare any conflicts of interest related to the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript and should decline the review if such conflicts exist. Unpublished material from the manuscript must not be used in the reviewers' own research without the authors' written consent. All privileged information obtained through peer review must remain confidential and not be used for personal advantage.

    Authors' Duties

    1. Reporting Standards: Authors must provide a truthful account of their work and results, with an objective discussion of their significance. Manuscripts should include sufficient detail and references to allow replication. Review articles should be accurate and comprehensive, while opinion or perspective pieces should be clearly labeled. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are considered unethical.

    2. Data Access and Retention: Authors might need to provide raw data for review and should be prepared to make this data publicly available if possible. Data should be accessible for at least 10 years after publication while protecting participant confidentiality and legal rights.

    3. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure their work is original and properly cite any sources or previous works used. Plagiarism, including presenting others' work as one's own or failing to attribute sources, is unethical.

    4. Multiple Submissions: Manuscripts should not be published in more than one journal or submitted concurrently to multiple journals. Secondary publication is permissible under specific conditions, such as mutual agreement of journals and accurate reflection of the primary document's data and interpretation.

    5. Authorship: Only those who meet the criteria for authorship—significant contribution to the study, manuscript drafting or critical revision, and approval of the final version—should be listed as authors. Significant contributors who do not meet these criteria should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section with their written consent.

    6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Authors should disclose any potential conflicts of interest early in the submission process and include this information in the manuscript. They should also disclose all financial support for their work.

    7. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors must properly acknowledge all sources used and cite influential publications. Information obtained privately or through confidential services must not be used without explicit written permission.

    8. Hazards and Subjects: Authors must identify any unusual hazards in their research and ensure compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines when using animals or human participants. They should include statements about informed consent and participant privacy.

    9. Peer Review Participation: Authors must participate in the peer review process, respond to editor requests for data and clarifications, and address reviewers' comments systematically. Revised manuscripts should be submitted by the given deadline.

    10. Errors in Published Works: Authors must promptly notify the journal of significant errors in their published work and cooperate in correcting or retracting the paper. If errors are identified by a third party, authors must provide evidence of the paper's correctness or correct/retract the paper.

    Publisher's Duties

    1. Handling Unethical Behavior: The publisher, in collaboration with editors, will address scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism by correcting or retracting affected articles. They will work to identify and prevent such issues and avoid encouraging or knowingly allowing misconduct.

    2. Access to Journal Content: The publisher is committed to ensuring permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and maintains accessibility through partnerships and a digital archive.

    Publication and Authorship

    1. Peer Review Process: All submissions undergo a rigorous peer-review process by at least two international experts. The review is blind, considering relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language. Decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection, with no guarantee of acceptance for revised submissions. Rejected articles are not re-reviewed. Acceptance is subject to legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Research cannot be included in multiple publications.

    Authors’ Responsibilities

    1. Original Work: Authors must certify that their manuscripts are original, have not been published elsewhere, and are not under consideration elsewhere. They must participate in peer review, correct mistakes, ensure significant contributions, provide authentic data, and disclose conflicts of interest.

    Reviewers’ Responsibilities

    1. Confidentiality and Objectivity: Reviewers must keep information confidential, conduct reviews objectively, and avoid personal criticism. They should provide clear, supported views, identify uncited relevant work, and disclose any conflicts of interest.

    Editors’ Responsibilities

    1. Decision Authority: Editors have the authority to accept or reject articles, ensure publication quality, consider author and reader needs, and uphold the academic record. They should publish corrections as needed, understand research funding sources, and base decisions on the paper's importance and relevance. Editors should preserve reviewer anonymity, ensure adherence to ethical guidelines, and address suspected misconduct with evidence. Conflicts of interest should be avoided, and editors should not reverse decisions without serious reason.

Sources: