Publication

Publication Ethics

PUSAKA ( Journal of Tourism, Hospitaity, Travel and Business Event) is a peer-reviewed electronic journal dedicated to study of the Tourism, Hospitality, travel and business event. Pusaka publishes full-length scholarly articles, shorter notes, project reports, and reviews of works in the field of tourism, hospitality, travel and business event.

In such a narrow field of study in toruism issues, it is frequently the case that scholars are fully aware of others’ specific research interests and ongoing projects. As a result, a qualified peer reviewer of any given article will often know who authored the article. In such cases, Pusaka practices single-blind peer review, with the reviewer aware of the identity of the author but the author never informed of the identity of the reviewer. Whenever practical, however, Pusaka practices double-blind peer review, with neither author nor reviewer knowing the other’s identity.

  1. Editor Responsibilities
    • Publication Decisions

The editor in Chief is responsible for determining the fate of each article submitted to the journal: publish, publish after revision, decline. The editor will assess manuscripts without regard to an author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The decision will be based on the paper’s relevance to the journal’s field of study, importance, originality, validity, and clarity. Current legal requirements regarding vilification, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered. The general editor shall create a file for each article submitted recording the decision made and including any supporting documentation relevant to that decision (e.g., reviewer reports, editorial board discussion).

  • Peer-Review Assignment

The editor in Chief of Pusaka will assign each article that is relevant to the journal’s field of study and that meets minimum standards of scholarship as determined by the general editor to two qualified peer reviewers. These peer reviewers may but are not required to be members of the editorial board.

  • Confidentiality

The editor in Chief of Pusaka and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a proposed article to anyone other than the corresponding author, assigned reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and SBL Press staff, as appropriate.

  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a proposed article must not be used in any way by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research or publication purposes without the author’s explicit written consent.

  1. Reviewer Responsibilities
    • Contribution to Editorial Decisions

The peer-review process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper.

  • Competence and Promptness

Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the specific topic of a proposed article or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and ask to be excused from the review process. The reviewer is encouraged to suggest to the general editor the names of those better able to complete a competent, timely review.

  • Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. It must not be disclosed to or discussed with others, including members of the editorial board and Pusaka staff, except as authorized by the editor in Chief.

  • Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted with as much objectivity as is possible. The reviewer’s evaluation should be grounded in the statements of the article and based on accepted scholarly evidence; personal criticism of the author is never acceptable. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

  • Acknowledgement of Prior Scholarship and Sources

Reviewers should identify instances in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been properly cited. They should also indicate when observations or arguments derived from other publications are not accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers are to notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between a manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

  • Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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 associated with the papers.