Çift-Körleme Hakemlik Sürecinin Etkinliği Konusunda Turizm Akademisyenlerinin Düşünceleri

Polat, Eray

doi:10.26677/tr1010.2020.377

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on PRP indicates that researchers and journal editors from various disciplines, including finance (Bailey, Hermason, & Tompkins, 2008), accounting (Bailey, Hermason & Lowers, 2008), marketing (Bailey et al, 2012), journalism (Curtin et al, 2018), and medicine (Snell & Spencer, 2005), generally have a positive perception of the process. Similarly, a positive perception is found in tourism (Correia & Kozak, 2017;Deale et al, 2021;Leung et al, 2014;Polat, 2020). However, several perspectives have criticised the process (Guo et al, 2022;Horbach & Halffman, 2018).…”

Section: Peer-review In Academic Journalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Publishing is a crucial activity for the development and dissemination of knowledge, in addition to its benefits. However, it can be challenging to achieve publication in high-impact journals due to the peer-review process (PRP) (Polat, 2020). During this process, experts in the field or topic evaluate manuscripts, and those with weak, incomplete, or inappropriate content are eliminated.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Publishing in Hospitality and Tourism Journals

Polat

2024

Tourism (Zagreb, Online)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to identify the criteria reviewers use to determine whether to accept or reject empirical manuscripts and to define which criteria are more significant. In this exploratory study, which utilizes qualitative research methods, 16 members of the Scientific Committee of the National Tourism Congress of Turkiye were asked to identify the primary areas they focus on when reviewing a manuscript. The data was analyzed using content analysis to determine the most significant criteria. The study identifies six criteria for acceptance and seven for rejection. The most important criterion for acceptance is the appropriateness and adequacy of the research method, while the most crucial criterion for rejection is methodological weakness. Other criteria influencing the reviewers' acceptance or rejection decisions focus on similar issues. The critical factor that distinguishes them is how the manuscript meets the requirements established by the reviewers. The study provided recommendations for future researchers.

show abstract