Publication Ethics

English and Tourism Studies (ETS) Publication Ethics COPE-informed

Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement

English and Tourism Studies (ETS) is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal published by Tinta Emas Institute. This statement defines expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher. ETS’s ethics framework is informed by the principles and guidance promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) .

Core Principles
  • Integrity & Rigor: no plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or deceptive reporting; methods and results must be described accurately.
  • Fairness: editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit; discrimination is prohibited.
  • Confidentiality: manuscripts and review materials are treated as confidential records.
  • Transparency: conflicts of interest, funding, and relevant declarations must be disclosed.
  • Accountability: errors are corrected; serious misconduct may result in rejection, retraction, and institutional notification where appropriate.

Responsibilities by Role

A) Duties of Editors
A1. Publication Decisions

Editors decide which submissions are published based on validity, originality, clarity, relevance to ETS scope, and contribution to the field. Decisions are guided by journal policies and may involve consultation with reviewers or editorial advisers. Editors must also observe legal and ethical constraints relating to defamation, copyright, plagiarism, and research misconduct.

A2. Fair Play

Manuscripts are evaluated for intellectual content without discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

A3. Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher (as needed). All communications are managed through the journal system to preserve double-blind integrity and an auditable decision trail.

A4. Disclosure & Conflicts of Interest

Editors must not use unpublished information for personal research or advantage without explicit written consent from the author. Editors must recuse themselves from handling a manuscript where conflicts exist (e.g., close collaboration, institutional ties, financial interests, personal relationships, or direct academic competition).
B) Duties of Reviewers
B1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists editors in decision-making and supports authors in improving their manuscripts through constructive and specific feedback. Reviewers should evaluate the work’s scholarly contribution, methodological rigor, and clarity within ETS scope.

B2. Promptness

Reviewers who are unqualified to review the manuscript or cannot review within the requested timeframe should decline promptly so the editor can invite alternative reviewers.

B3. Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review are confidential and must not be shared or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor. Ideas or data obtained through peer review must not be used for personal advantage.

B4. Objectivity & Evidence-Based Review

Reviews should be objective and supported by clear arguments. Personal criticism is inappropriate. When recommending changes, reviewers should be specific (e.g., indicate exact sections, missing controls, unclear reasoning, or unsupported claims).

B5. Acknowledgement of Sources & Overlap

Reviewers should identify relevant published work not cited by the authors and alert the editor to substantial similarity or overlap with other works, including suspected plagiarism or redundant publication.
C) Duties of Authors
C1. Reporting Standards

Authors must present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Data, methods, and analysis should be described sufficiently to allow verification and replication where appropriate. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

C2. Data Access & Retention

Authors may be asked to provide underlying data for editorial assessment. Where practicable, authors should be prepared to provide access to data and retain it for a reasonable period after publication, consistent with privacy, consent, and legal obligations.

C3. Originality, Plagiarism & Proper Attribution

Authors must ensure the manuscript is entirely original. If authors use others’ work (text, ideas, data, figures), it must be properly cited or quoted. ETS screens submissions for similarity and enforces a strict plagiarism policy.

C4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Authors should not publish essentially the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals concurrently is unethical and unacceptable.

C5. Authorship & Contributorship

Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included, all co-authors approve the final manuscript, and all agree to submission. Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately.

C6. Hazards, Human/Animal Subjects & Ethics Approval (where applicable)

If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment with unusual hazards, these must be clearly identified. Research involving human participants or animals must comply with applicable ethical approvals, consent procedures, and regulations.

C7. Disclosure & Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial or other conflicts that could influence interpretation of the work and acknowledge all sources of funding.

C8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in a published article, they must promptly notify the editor and cooperate to correct or retract the article as appropriate.

Handling Allegations of Misconduct (procedure)
ETS evaluates suspected misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, duplicate publication, image manipulation, fabricated/falsified data) using a fair and confidential process:
  1. Initial assessment: the handling editor reviews evidence (similarity reports, reviewer notes, documentation).
  2. Author clarification: authors may be asked to provide explanations, raw data, ethics approvals, or permissions.
  3. Editorial review: editors may consult additional reviewers or editorial advisers where needed.
  4. Decision: outcomes may include revision request, rejection, correction, expression of concern, or retraction.
  5. Notification: in severe cases, ETS may inform the author’s institution or funder, consistent with evidence and due process.
ETS maintains an auditable record of ethics-related communications via the journal system.
Editorial Independence (commercial influence)
The publisher and ETS editorial board ensure that advertising, sponsorship, reprints, or other commercial considerations do not influence editorial decisions. Editorial decisions are based solely on scholarly merit, policy compliance, and integrity of the scholarly record.
Publisher: Tinta Emas Institute