Utilization of ICT Tools on Travel and Tourism Organizations in Madurai – A Survey


S Senthil Kumar

Assistant Professor, Department of Catering Science and Hotel Management, Kalasalingam University (Deemed), Krishnankovil, Tamil Nadu, India

R Kannan

Professor, Centre for Tourism & Hotel Management, Madurai Kamaraj University, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India

Peer Review Report

Received Date

11.12.2018

Accepted Date

05.01.2019

Published Date

30.01.2019

Plagiarism

Accepted Level

Reviewer’s Comments to Authors

This survey study is on utilization of ICT tools on travel and tourism organizations in Madurai has been done to give an analytical survey report of the usage of ICT tools and its help in the travel and tourism organisation in Madurai district. 25 respondents including 5 tour operators, 12 travel agents and 13 are from various star category hotels in Madurai.

Major Comments

  1. Abstract is not fulfilling its purpose. Abstract should cover the complete need of the study and more number of keywords can be given. So the readers of the article can get narrative view of the entire study.
  2. Very important part of any research study is objective. This paper is not framed with any objective it seems. There is no any objective of the study in any part of the paper. Without objective a research study will not be a complete one. So, the author has to add objectives of the study.
  3. Introduction part of the study is not completing its requirements. It should justify why the particular research has been done. So the author should include some details which justifying the title of the study.
  4. There is no information on the research methodology used for the study. Researcher should concentrate on this part and give the methodology of selecting this particular topic.
  5. There is no information on data collection, period of study, techniques used for collecting the data, footnote and findings for the study. The author should focus on the above mentioned parts which are mainly needed for a research study.
  6. Conclusion of the study is not a complete one. The other readers of the paper can’t get the exact figure of result from the conclusion given in the paper. The author should write the conclusion based on the title, research findings and should create options for further studies.

Minor Comments

  1. There was no mention of the limitations of the study, one of which is the apparently high dropout rate. Also, mention how your results compare to (reference given to author) another study which was published very recently.
  2. For every reference there should be a footnote in the relevant pages.
  3. Researcher can be highlight the research gap and pave the way for future research (scope for future research).

Associate Editor’s Critique

The study has much strength where there was minor weakness also. The very important needed information of the study like objectives of the study, methodology used to select the sampling population, period of the study and detailed recommendations & conclusion are missing. The author should include all the needed information for the study to strengthen the value of the paper.

Constructiveness of Comments

The review committee has given the constructive comments to the author /researcher.

Level of Detail of the Review

The review is fairly detailed, but the reviewer missed data inconsistence in the required field. There are minor corrections to be taken place before the final review.

Substantiation of Comments

The reviewer made comments on the paper with references.

Was the Review Biased?

The study was reviewed under ‘nil’ biased basis.

Recommendation from the Reviewer

I recommend that, this paper be accepted after the above mentioned minor revisions.