The peer review process of TConnect: Journal of Tourism Connectivity is designed to maintain rigorous academic standards while providing an efficient and transparent evaluation process for contemporary research in tourism, hospitality, technology, infrastructure, and interconnected systems.

1. Core Principles

TConnect applies a Double-Blind Peer Review system in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another throughout the review process. This approach is intended to minimize potential bias and ensure that manuscripts are evaluated primarily on their academic quality, originality, methodological rigor, relevance, and contribution to the field.

All reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality, provide objective and constructive evaluations, and disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

2. Evaluation Stages

Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial screening by the editorial team. The screening assesses:

• Alignment with the journal’s Focus and Scope;
• Compliance with the journal’s Author Guidelines;
• Manuscript structure and academic presentation;
• Originality and potential plagiarism concerns;
• Ethical and research integrity requirements; and
• Basic compliance with APA 7th Edition referencing.

Manuscripts that fall substantially outside the journal’s scope, fail to meet essential submission requirements, or raise significant ethical or originality concerns may be rejected at the editorial screening stage.

Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are anonymized and assigned to at least two independent peer reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area of the manuscript.

Reviewer selection may consider expertise in areas such as tourism and hospitality, physical infrastructure, digital tourism ecosystems, artificial intelligence, destination networks, supply-chain management, sustainability, or related interdisciplinary fields.

Double-Blind Review

Reviewers independently evaluate the manuscript and provide constructive comments and recommendations to the editorial team. Reviewers are expected to assess the manuscript based on its:

• Originality and contribution to knowledge;
• Theoretical foundation;
• Methodological rigor;
• Quality and validity of analysis;
• Clarity of presentation;
• Relevance to the journal’s scope;
• Ethical and research integrity considerations; and
• Practical or theoretical implications.

Reviewer comments should be professional, evidence-based, and constructive.

Editorial Decision

Following the completion of peer review, the Editor-in-Chief or designated editor considers the reviewers’ reports and makes the editorial decision.

Possible decisions include:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

Where revisions are requested, authors may be required to provide a detailed response to reviewers and revise the manuscript accordingly. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when appropriate.

The final editorial decision rests with the journal’s editorial team and is based on the overall quality and suitability of the manuscript.

3. Specific Assessment Criteria

In addition to general academic and methodological standards, TConnect encourages reviewers to consider the following dimensions where relevant to the manuscript:

Connectivity and Innovation

Reviewers assess the originality and significance of the study in addressing relationships, networks, or connectivity challenges within tourism and hospitality ecosystems.

Digital and Research Ethics

For studies involving artificial intelligence, big data, digital footprints, social-media data, online platforms, or other digital sources, reviewers consider the transparency and appropriateness of data collection, processing, privacy protection, and ethical practices.

Operational and Practical Relevance

Where applicable, reviewers assess the potential of the findings to contribute to tourism infrastructure, destination management, hospitality operations, supply-chain efficiency, technological implementation, or other practical applications.

Theoretical Contribution

Reviewers consider whether the study extends, challenges, integrates, or provides meaningful evidence for existing theories and conceptual perspectives in tourism, hospitality, and related disciplines.

Sustainability and Future Relevance

Where relevant, manuscripts are evaluated for their contribution to sustainable, resilient, inclusive, or regenerative approaches to tourism development.

4. Review Timeline

TConnect aims to provide an efficient peer review process while maintaining appropriate academic scrutiny.

The journal’s target timeframe for the first-round editorial decision is approximately 4–6 weeks from submission, subject to reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, revision requirements, and other circumstances.

The stated timeframe is a target rather than a guarantee. In cases where additional reviewers are required or reviews are delayed, the process may take longer.

5. Reviewer Confidentiality and Responsibilities

Reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. They must not share, reproduce, distribute, or use unpublished information contained in a manuscript for personal or professional purposes.

Reviewers should promptly inform the editorial team if they identify a potential conflict of interest or believe that they lack sufficient expertise to evaluate the manuscript.

By maintaining confidentiality, impartiality, and constructive scholarly criticism, reviewers contribute to the integrity and quality of the publication process at TConnect: Journal of Tourism Connectivity.