Peer Review Process

The Indonesian Journal of Language and Tourism Studies  applies a rigorous and transparent peer-review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, relevance, methodological soundness, and scholarly contribution of all manuscripts submitted for publication.

The peer-review process generally consists of the following stages:

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal's official online submission system. The submitted manuscript must comply with the journal's focus and scope, author guidelines, ethical requirements, and manuscript preparation standards.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the manuscript is complete and that all authors have approved the submitted version.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, the editorial team conducts an initial screening to determine whether the manuscript:

Fits the focus and scope of IJLTS;
Meets the basic requirements of the journal's author guidelines;
Demonstrates sufficient academic quality and relevance;
Contains an appropriate research design and methodology;
Meets basic originality and publication ethics requirements;
Is presented in clear and academically appropriate English.

The editorial team may conduct a preliminary similarity or plagiarism check at this stage.

Manuscripts that are clearly outside the journal's scope, fail to meet basic submission requirements, contain significant ethical or originality concerns, or demonstrate insufficient academic quality may be rejected at the editorial screening stage without external peer review.

3. Reviewer Selection

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to qualified reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area of the manuscript.

Reviewers are selected based on their:

Academic expertise;
Research experience;
Knowledge of the manuscript's subject area;
Methodological competence;
Absence of conflicts of interest.

Where possible, reviewers should not have personal, professional, or institutional relationships with the authors that could compromise the objectivity of the review.

4. Peer Review Method

IJLTS applies a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during the review process.

Authors should therefore ensure that the submitted manuscript does not unnecessarily disclose their identities within the main manuscript file.

The journal may use qualified reviewers from different institutions, regions, or countries to promote independent and objective evaluation.

5. Review Criteria

Reviewers are generally asked to evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

Relevance to the journal's focus and scope;
Originality and novelty;
Clarity of the research problem;
Adequacy of the literature review;
Appropriateness of the theoretical or conceptual framework;
Methodological rigor and appropriateness;
Quality and clarity of data analysis;
Accuracy and consistency of results;
Quality of the discussion;
Contribution to language, tourism, hospitality, culture, or related interdisciplinary studies;
Theoretical and practical implications;
Quality and relevance of references;
Clarity and organization of the manuscript;
Compliance with research and publication ethics.

For empirical studies, reviewers may also consider the appropriateness of the research participants, sampling procedures, data collection instruments, analytical techniques, and validity, reliability, or trustworthiness procedures.

6. Reviewer Recommendations

After evaluating the manuscript, reviewers may provide one of the following recommendations:

Accept – the manuscript is suitable for publication with no or only very minor changes.
Minor Revision – the manuscript requires limited revisions before it can be considered for publication.
Major Revision – substantial revisions are required, and the revised manuscript may undergo another round of review.
Reject and Resubmit – the manuscript has potential but requires substantial redevelopment before it can be considered as a new or substantially revised submission.
Reject – the manuscript does not meet the journal's academic, methodological, ethical, or scope requirements.

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final editorial decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or authorized editor based on the reviewers' evaluations and the overall quality and suitability of the manuscript.

7. Revision Process

When revisions are required, authors should carefully address all reviewer and editorial comments.

Authors may be required to submit:

A revised version of the manuscript;
A response to reviewers' comments;
A detailed explanation of changes made in the revised manuscript.

Authors should clearly indicate how each substantive reviewer comment has been addressed. If an author disagrees with a particular recommendation, a clear academic justification should be provided.

8. Second-Round or Further Review

A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or assigned to other qualified reviewers, depending on the nature and extent of the revisions.

Further review may be conducted when:

Major methodological issues were identified;
Substantial changes were requested;
Reviewers need to verify whether their concerns have been adequately addressed;
The editor considers additional expert assessment necessary.

The number of review rounds is determined by the editor according to the needs of the manuscript.

9. Editorial Decision

After considering the reviewers' reports and the revised manuscript, the editor makes the final decision regarding publication.

The possible final decisions include:

Accept;
Accept with minor revisions;
Major revision;
Reject.

The editorial decision considers the overall scholarly quality of the manuscript rather than relying solely on a single reviewer's recommendation.

10. Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to IJLTS and the information obtained during the peer-review process should be treated as confidential.

Reviewers must not:

Share the manuscript or its contents with others without authorization;
Use unpublished information for personal or professional advantage;
Discuss the manuscript with unauthorized individuals;
Use ideas or data from the manuscript before publication.

Editors and reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.

11. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers and editors must disclose any potential conflict of interest that could affect their impartiality.

A reviewer should decline the review assignment if they have a significant personal, professional, institutional, financial, or academic relationship with the authors or the research that could compromise objective evaluation.

12. Reviewer Ethics

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, respectful, and evidence-based comments.

Reviewer comments should focus on improving the academic quality of the manuscript and should not contain personal, discriminatory, offensive, or irrelevant remarks.

Reviewers should also inform the editor if they identify:

Suspected plagiarism;
Duplicate publication;
Fabricated or manipulated data;
Significant ethical concerns;
Undisclosed conflicts of interest;
Serious methodological or scholarly problems.
13. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based on the academic quality, originality, relevance, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and scholarly contribution of the manuscript.

Editorial decisions should not be influenced by the authors' nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, religion, political views, personal relationships, or other non-academic considerations.

14. Publication Decision

A manuscript will proceed to publication only after it has successfully completed the required editorial and peer-review processes and has received final editorial approval.

Acceptance for publication indicates that the manuscript has satisfied the journal's academic and editorial requirements. Final publication is subject to completion of the production, proofreading, and publication procedures.

15. Estimated Review Timeline

IJLTS aims to process manuscripts efficiently while maintaining the quality and integrity of peer review. The duration of the review process may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, revision requirements, and the number of review rounds required.

Authors will be informed of significant editorial decisions through the journal's online submission system or official editorial communication channels.