Çift-Körleme Hakemlik Sürecinin Etkinliği Konusunda Turizm Akademisyenlerinin Düşünceleri

Abstract

The manuscripts sent to peer-reviewed journals are subjected to an audit called the peer review process in order to control them from various angles. The double-blind peer review process (CK), which is one of these processes, is predominantly preferred by scientific journals in the discipline of tourism and has been carried out for many years. However, in recent years, CK has been subject to criticism in various aspects. In this context, the aim of the study is to determine the thoughts of tourism academicians about the CK. In this research, where qualitative research methods are used, the population consists of the academicians taking part in the scientific committee of the 20th National Tourism Congress. The population is required to be accessible and because of this no need for sampling. The semi-structured interview form, which was interviewed electronically, was used in order to collect data. The obtained data were analyzed by descriptive analysis method. According to the results, tourism academicians (69%) think that the process increases the quality of the manuscripts. In addition, the process, objectivity and quality assurance in terms of providing advantages; it also has the disadvantages that time and referees can make sloppy review. Finally, it is foreseen by the academicians that the process can be improved by some precautions taken by the editors and referees.