Peer Review Process

English and Tourism Studies (ETS) applies a double-blind peer review: reviewers do not know authors’ identities and vice versa.

1-2 weeks	~ 2–8 weeks
Submission → First editorial decision	External review (per round)

1) Overview

All submissions to ETS undergo external peer review. In general, each manuscript is evaluated by one to three reviewers per round. Reviewers’ assessments inform the Editor’s decision to accept, request revision, or reject the manuscript.

2) Evaluation Criteria

Section coherence: title, abstract, introduction, methods, results & discussion, conclusion.
Novelty & impact: contribution to knowledge; significance for English–tourism studies.
Rigor & methodology: design, data quality, analysis, and ethical compliance.
Use of references: adequacy, recency, and relevance (ETS uses IEEE style for citations).
Presentation: clarity, organization, tables/figures, and language quality.

3) Double-Blind Review: Step-by-Step

Submission (Author) — Author submits a blinded manuscript via the ETS system (no names/affiliations in the review file; metadata checked).
Initial Check (Editor) — Scope fit, formatting, similarity screening, and ethics compliance. Non-compliant manuscripts may be returned or rejected.
Reviewer Selection (Editor) — The Editor invites 1–3 experts aligned with the topic and free of conflicts of interest.
External Review (Reviewers) — Reviewers provide written, evidence-based comments and a recommendation (see outcomes below).
Editorial Decision (Editor) — Decision is communicated with consolidated feedback.
Revision (Author) — Author submits a revised manuscript plus a response-to-reviewers (point-by-point), keeping the file blinded.
Re-evaluation — Revised versions may be sent back to the same or new reviewers, or assessed by the Editor. Steps 4–6 can repeat until a final decision.
Final Decision (Editor) — Accept or Reject. Accepted papers proceed to copyediting, layout, and proofing before publication.

Decision	What it means	Author action
Accept	Ready for production with minor editorial polish.	Upload final files; proceed to proofs.
Minor Revision	Limited changes; no new experiments or data collection expected.	Revise + response letter; quick re-check by editor/reviewer.
Major Revision	Substantial changes; may require additional analyses or restructuring.	Revise thoroughly + detailed response; re-review likely.
Reject	Insufficient fit, rigor, or contribution; not recommended for ETS.	Consider another venue or substantial re-work before new submission.

4) Reviewer Selection & Suggestions

Reviewer Invitation Policy: All reviewers are invited through the journal system. During submission, authors are required to propose three (3) potential reviewers suitable for the manuscript and include their details in the draft. The Editor evaluates these suggestions and may invite one or more of them. If any suggestion is unsuitable or conflicted, the Editor will invite a more neutral reviewer to ensure an objective double-blind review.

5) Blinding & Research Integrity

Author anonymity: remove names/affiliations, self-identifying statements, and funding IDs from the review file; keep these only in the metadata (for staff use).
Conflict of interest: Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts; conflicted reviewers will not be invited.
Confidentiality: Review content and manuscripts are confidential; quotes from reviews require permission.
Ethics checks: Similarity and ethics compliance are screened prior to review and at decision stages.

6) Communication & Timelines

All communications are handled within the ETS online system to preserve double-blind integrity. Editors monitor review progress and may replace delayed reviewers. Indicative timelines: ~2 weeks submission to first decision; ~4–8 weeks for a full external review round. Complex revisions may require additional time.

7) Appeals

Authors may appeal by writing to the Editorial Team, providing a clear, evidence-based rationale. Appeals are evaluated by an independent editor and may involve additional expert advice. Decisions on appeals are final.

For updates, see the official page: Peer Review Process — ETS.