Ethical principles and policies


Ethical principles

All manuscripts are subject to a double-blind peer-review process based on an initial screening for significant contribution to the field, conceptual quality, appropriate methodology, and clarity of expression, in line with editorial criteria and the evaluation principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The publication of an article in a 'double-blind peer-reviewed' journal is essential in the development of a coherent and reputable knowledge network. In double-blind peer review, articles written by 'prestigious' or recognised authors are judged on the content of their articles rather than the reputation of the author. It is therefore crucial to agree on the expected standards of ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: authors, journal editor, reviewers and publisher. Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work and, if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been properly cited.


About the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE,

COPE advises editors and publishers on all aspects of publication ethics, and in particular on how to handle cases of research and publication misconduct. It also provides a forum for its members to discuss individual cases. COPE does not investigate individual cases, but encourages editors to ensure that cases are investigated by the appropriate authorities (usually a research institution or employer). All COPE members are expected to apply the COPE publication ethics principles summarised in the core practices.


Responsibilities of editors

1- Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal will be published. The editor will evaluate manuscripts without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors. The decision will be based on the significance, originality and clarity of the article and the relevance of the work and its relevance to the scope of the journal. Existing legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism should also be taken into account.

2-Peer-Reviewer selection
The editor assigns at least 2 referees to evaluate the manuscript. At this stage, he/she selects a referee who is an expert in his/her field, taking into account the subject of the paper. In doing so, the editor avoids practices that would remove the anonymity of the paper. He/she avoids assigning reviewers who have interaction with the author. If possible, he/she assigns a referee from a country other than the country where the manuscript was submitted. He/she takes into account the quality and objectivity of the referees' evaluation, and if necessary, continues the process with other referees..

3- Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff should not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate.

4- Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished material described in a submitted manuscript will not be used by the editor or editorial board members for their own research purposes without the express written permission of the author.


Responsibilities of reviewers

1- Contribution to Editorial Decisions:
The peer-review process aids the editor and the editorial board in making informed editorial decisions while also providing authors with constructive feedback to enhance their papers.

2- Promptness:
Referees who believe they lack the expertise required to review a manuscript or anticipate a delay in the review process should promptly inform the editor and recuse themselves.

3- Confidentiality:
All manuscripts provided for review should be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share or discuss them with others unless authorized by the editor.

4- Objectivity Standards:
Reviews must be conducted impartially. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should present their opinions clearly, supported by well-reasoned arguments.

5- Source Acknowledgment:
Reviewers should identify instances where relevant published work cited in the paper is missing from the reference section. They should also indicate whether observations or arguments derived from other sources are properly attributed. Reviewers are encouraged to inform the editor of substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and other works they are aware of.

6- Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:
Information or ideas acquired through the peer-review process must be treated confidentially and should not be used for personal gain. Reviewers should abstain from evaluating manuscripts involving conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other affiliations with the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscripts.


Authors' Responsibilities:
1- Conformity with Reporting Standards:
Authors of original research must present their work accurately and provide an objective analysis of its significance. The underlying data should be represented accurately, and the paper should provide sufficient detail and references to permit replication. False or deliberately inaccurate statements are reprehensible and unacceptable.

2- Data Access and Storage:
For editorial evaluation, authors may be required to submit the raw data alongside their paper. Additionally, they should be willing to make this information accessible to the public whenever feasible. Authors must ensure that these data are accessible to qualified professionals for a minimum of ten years after publication, preferably through an institutional or subject-based data repository, while protecting participant anonymity and observing legal rights.

3- Originality, Plagiarism, and Citation of Sources:
Authors must submit works that are wholly original and properly attribute the work and words of others. Any influential publications that contributed to the work that is being reported must also be cited.

4- Avoiding Multiple, Duplicative, and Concurrent Publication:
Similar research should not generally be published in multiple journals. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior. Manuscripts previously published and protected by copyright cannot be submitted. In addition, manuscripts that are currently being reviewed by other journals should not be submitted for publication again.

5- Responsibility and Contributions:
Authorship should be reserved for those who have made substantial contributions to the study's conception, execution, or interpretation. All substantial contributors must be credited as co-authors. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all contributing co-authors are listed correctly and that uninvolved parties are omitted from the author manifest. Additionally, the corresponding author must verify that all co-authors have reviewed and endorsed the final version of the manuscript and its submission for publication.

6- Disclosure and Conflict of Interest Management:
All authors are required to disclose any financial or substantive conflicts of interest that might affect the results or interpretation of the manuscript. Furthermore, all sources of financial support must be disclosed.

7- Correcting Basic Errors in Published Works:
If they discover substantial errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, authors are required to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher. They must collaborate with the editor to publish a retraction or correction as an erratum.

For articles requiring Ethics Committee Approval

Ethics committee approval must be obtained for studies that require an ethics committee decision for studies conducted in all disciplines.
Researches requiring Ethics Committee approval are as follows:

1- All kinds of research conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from participants using survey, interview, focus group study, observation, experiment, interview techniques.

2- Use of humans and animals (including material/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes,

3- Clinical trials on humans,

4- Research on animals,

5- Retrospective studies in accordance with the law on the protection of personal data,

Copyright and Licensing Policy

The copyright in TD's content is assigned to the author, the original publication right and the dissemination right of the first publication are owned by TD and licensed under the CC-BY licence (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)). Third parties may copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and may remix, transform and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, by giving appropriate credit, providing a link to the licence and indicating whether changes have been made. Authors are free to use their copyrighted works under the CC-BY licence. Please see the following link for the licence terms.

All legal and scientific responsibilities regarding the content of the articles published in TD belong to the author(s). No royalties are paid to the author(s) for the articles. Authors and copyright holders agree that all users have free access. Authors will have the right to share their article in the same way permitted to third parties under the relevant user licence, as well as certain scholarly usage rights. Parties submitting to TD are deemed to have accepted the policies of the journal.

Open Access Policy

Tourist Destination (TD) is a free open access electronic journal that does not charge any author fees, article submission or any article processing fees. This is due to the support of the founding researchers and academics. TD 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.

TD is a fully open access publication, which means that the literature is freely available over the public internet at no cost to readers who authorise any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full texts of these articles, scan them for indexing, import them as data into software, or use them for any other lawful purpose without financial, legal or technical barriers other than those inseparable from access to the internet itself.

Accordingly, TD adopts and supports an Open Access policy in accordance with the definition set forth by the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) ( Therefore, we acknowledge the right of users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full text of these articles (within the terms of the licence).


Plagiarism Detection

Prevention of plagiarism is of utmost importance to ensure scientific and academic integrity. Each work submitted to TD is first analysed by a plagiarism software (such as Turnitin, iThenticate or Intihal.Net). Before the evaluation, it is analysed on a single word basis excluding the bibliography. At the end of the analysis, the total similarity rate should be maximum 20% and the similarity rate for a single work should be maximum 5%. If the similarity level of the study is higher than stated above, it will be rejected. Even if it is within the similarity limits, the similarity reports of these studies are manually analysed. If the editor deems necessary, plagiarism analysis can be performed after evaluation and revisions. The decision as to whether a manuscript will be rejected due to plagiarism or whether it will continue the peer review process rests with the editor handling the manuscript.

Repository Policy

Authors may share their preprints anytime, anywhere.
If accepted for publication, we encourage authors to link from the preprint to their official publication via a Digital Object Identifier (DOI). A large number of researchers have access to the official publications in TD OJS, and so links will help your users find, access, cite and use the best available version.
Authors can update their preprints in arXiv or RePEc with their accepted papers.

Accepted and Published:
TD allows authors to use the final published version of an article or edited collection section (publisher pdf) for self-archiving (author's personal website) and/or archiving in an institutional repository (on a non-profit server) after publication.

The published source must be indicated. For articles, a link to the journal homepage or the DOI of the articles must be provided. Authors may self-archive their articles in public and non-commercial subject-based repositories. All volumes (publisher pdf) can be uploaded to institutional repositories immediately after publication. The published source should be cited and a link to the dedicated web page of the volume should be provided.