Publication Ethics
Standards for rigorous scholarly publishing
The Mustansiriyah Journal of Sustainable Tourism Sciences (MJSTS) upholds rigorous standards of integrity, fairness, and transparency across every stage of the publishing process. The principles below apply to authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher alike, and have been shaped to fit the realities of research in sustainable tourism, hospitality management, tourism economics, and related fields. They draw on internationally recognized publishing norms, including the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), while reflecting the journal's own editorial priorities.
Policy Contents
1. Allegations of Misconduct
Any concern regarding plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submission, or other research misconduct is treated as a serious editorial matter. The editorial board examines each case on its merits, gives the parties involved a fair opportunity to respond, and may consult the authors' home institution where warranted. Confirmed misconduct can lead to rejection, correction, or retraction of the affected work, and to the author being barred from future submissions.
2. Authorship and Contributorship
Authorship is reserved for individuals who have made a genuine intellectual contribution to the conception, execution, or interpretation of the study, and who accept responsibility for its content. The corresponding author confirms, at submission, that the author list is complete and accurately ordered, and that all named authors have approved the final manuscript. Individuals who assisted with the work in a lesser capacity should be acknowledged rather than listed as authors.
3. Complaints and Appeals
Authors, reviewers, or readers who have a concern about an editorial decision or about the conduct of the review process may raise it directly with the editorial office. Complaints are acknowledged promptly and reviewed by an editor who was not involved in the original decision wherever possible. Authors dissatisfied with a rejection may request a reconsideration by submitting a written justification, which the editorial board evaluates before issuing a final response.
4. Conflicts of Interest
Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to disclose any financial, professional, or personal relationship that could reasonably be seen to influence their judgment. Editors and reviewers with a potential conflict regarding a submission step aside from handling it. Declared conflicts are noted in the published article where relevant, so that readers can assess the work in full context.
5. Data and Reproducibility
Authors are expected to present their methodology in enough detail that another researcher could, in principle, repeat the study. Where data, questionnaires, or analysis code underlie the findings, authors should be prepared to make them available to editors or reviewers on reasonable request, subject to any legitimate confidentiality or ethical restriction. Statistical and empirical claims should be traceable to the reported data.
6. Ethical Oversight
Studies involving human participants must show evidence of informed consent and, where applicable, approval from a recognized research ethics committee. Authors are responsible for ensuring that data collection in tourism and hospitality settings, including field surveys and interviews, respected the rights, privacy, and wellbeing of participants throughout.
7. Intellectual Property
Submitted work must be the authors' own, properly attributing prior work through accurate citation rather than unacknowledged reuse. Reproducing substantial material — text, tables, figures, or data — from another publication requires the authors to secure permission from the rights holder and to credit the original source clearly. The journal will act on credible evidence of infringement, including correction or retraction as warranted.
8. Journal Management
Editorial decisions are made independently of commercial or institutional pressure, based solely on a manuscript's scholarly merit, originality, and fit with the journal's scope. The editorial board is responsible for the overall integrity of the publishing process and reviews its policies periodically to keep pace with evolving standards in scholarly publishing.
9. Peer Review Process
Every submission that passes initial screening is evaluated through double-blind peer review by at least two qualified reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers are asked to evaluate submissions on their scholarly merit alone, to keep manuscript content confidential, and to disclose any conflict of interest before accepting an assignment. The handling editor weighs the reviewers' assessments alongside their own reading of the manuscript in reaching a final decision.
10. Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections
Readers may raise scholarly comments or questions about a published article through the journal's official email. Where a substantive error or instance of misconduct is confirmed after publication, the journal issues the necessary correction or retraction and publishes an explanatory notice, linked to the original article, that records the reason for and date of the change.
This policy is reviewed periodically against current best practice in scholarly publishing. Questions about publication ethics may be directed to the journal's editorial office via its official email.
Last reviewed: August 2026