AIMS AND SCOPE

Jurnal Kajian dan Terapan Pariwisata (JKTP) aims at providing a media or forum for researchers, lectures, and graduate students to publish their original research papers in the field of studies and applied tourism. This jurnal publishes articles twice a year (May and November).

The scope of JKTP includes:

• Ecotourism
• Spiritual Tourism
• Cultural Tourism
• Marine Tourism
• Culinary Tourism
• Community-Based Tourism
• Hospitality Industry Management
• Tour and Travel Businesses 
• Destination Development
• Language Study on Tourism
• etc.

JKTP is published by the Research and Community Service Institute, Denpasar Academy of Tourism.

OPEN ACCESS POLICY

The JKTP journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

PUBLICATION ETHICS

Author Ethics

Author(s) must:

1. explain the process and results of research or studies to the editor in an honest, clear and comprehensive manner, and keep research and study data properly and safely;
2. ensure that the manuscripts that have been sent or submitted to the editorial staff are original, written by the author, and originating from the author's ideas, not plagiarism of other people's written works or ideas. Authors are strictly prohibited from changing the name of the cited reference source to the name of another person;
3. explain to the editor that the manuscript sent to the editor is a manuscript that has never been sent to another journal publisher. If "redundancy" is found in the submission of the manuscript to another publisher, the editorial team will reject the manuscript sent by the author;
4. have expertise in accordance with the JKTP focus;
5. include the affiliation of the institution;
6. immediately inform the editorial staff if errors are found in the writing of the script, both the results of the review and the edits. These typographical errors include writing names, affiliations or institutions, quotations, and other writings that can reduce the meaning and substance of the manuscript;
7. understand the ethics of scientific publication above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties, so that manuscripts can be processed smoothly and safely; and
8. The author who sends the manuscript to the editorial staff is the first author, so that if there are problems in the publishing process, it can be resolved more easily.

Editor Ethics

Editor(s) must:

1. ensure that the manuscript review process is thorough, transparent, objective, fair and accurate. This becomes the basis for the editor to make a decision on the manuscript, whether it is rejected or accepted. In this case, the editorial board acts as the manuscript selection team;
2. ensure that the script writing guidelines for writers and other interested parties can be accessed and read clearly, both in printed and electronic versions;
3. ensure peer reviewer(s), manuscript materials for review, and clearly inform the terms and process of reviewing manuscripts to peer reviewer(s);
4. be objective, neutral, and honest in editing the manuscript, regardless of gender, business side, ethnicity, religion, race, class, and author's nationality;
5. maintain any information properly, especially those related to the privacy of the author and the distribution of the manuscript; and
6. understand the ethics of scientific publication above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties, so that the manuscript publishing process runs smoothly and safely.

Peer Reviewer Ethics

Peer reviewer(s) must:

1. honest, objective, unbiased, independent, and only in favour of scientific truth. The process of reviewing the manuscript was carried out in a professional manner without distinguishing between gender, business side, ethnicity, religion, race, inter-group, and the nationality of the author;
2. ensure that the reference source / manuscript citation is appropriate and credible (can be accounted for). If errors or irregularities are found in the writing of the reference / quotation source, the reviewer must immediately inform the editorial staff to make corrections by the author according to the notes from the peer reviewer(s).
3. responding to manuscripts that have been sent by the editorial staff and working in accordance with the predetermined manuscript review time (maximum 4 weeks). If you need additional time in reviewing the manuscript, you must immediately report to the editorial secretariat; and
4. understand the ethics of scientific publication above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties, so that the manuscript publishing process runs smoothly and safely.

Journal Management / Editorial Board Ethics

Journal Management must:

1. describe the mission and objectives of the organization, especially those relating to policy making and journal publishing decisions without any particular interest;
2. give freedom to reviewers and editors to create a comfortable work atmosphere and respect the privacy of the author;
3. guarantee and protect intellectual property rights (copyright), and manage funds received by third parties in a transparent manner. Journal managers must also promote publication to the public by guaranteeing the usefulness of the use of the manuscript; and
4. understand the ethics of scientific publication above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties, so that the manuscript publishing process runs smoothly and safely.

Publication decisions

The editor of JKTP is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the 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 connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her published work, the author must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

• Reviewers will provide written feedback on the appointed time with  a commitment to contribute scientific values and significance to the assigned duty, e.g. by making available the reviewer’s feedback in written documents.concerning purpose of the research and its scientific values, this is done by mitra bebestari (reviewers) in written documents.
• Reviewers will confirm whether  submitted manuscripts are well-composed, concise, relevant, scientifically accurate, original, and of the journal’s focus and scope. persuasive.
• Reviewers will avoid personal comments and critics.
• Reviewers will not open communication in any form with authors except authorized by the editor. Strictly forbidden contacting the author without permission from the editor.
• In the case of being unconfident to return a review within the mutually agreed time frame, reviewers will promptly inform the editor and recommend other potential reviewers. Informing the editor as soon as possible if fail to finish the review beyond the due date and suggesting other qualified reviewers.
• Reviewers will decide the the scientific performance, originality, and the work’s scope. Reviewers should provide feedback for improvement and give recommendations of acceptance or rejection based on evaluation scale. during the rating scale.
• Reviewers will check the manuscript for its originality and ensure that there is no copyright infringement. Checking that every article is original and did not violate any copyright.
• Reviewers will notify the editors if they have conflicts of interests resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with the authors, institutions, or companies related to the manuscripts. Telling the editors to be aware of conflicts may caused by the article, such as private, financial, and etc; should it happens, reviewers must find the right solution to solve it.
• Reviewers will ensure that the standards and policies applied by the journal have been appropriately adhered by the submitted manuscripts.  Ensuring that the article is meeting journal’s standard.
• Reviewers will protect readers from erroneous or defective researches  which might not be verifiable or able to be validated by the readers..
• Reviewers will anticipate any statements from previous relevant reports or published works without proper citing. citing the works which is relevant for other scholars.