Do people still have to do this?

Since August 2025, Professor Dr. Wolfram Höpken from RWU Ravensburg-Weingarten University of Applied Sciences has been one of three "Editors in Chief" of the journal "Information Technology & Tourism", a scientific journal published by Springer Nature Limited based in London. In this interview, he talks about this new role and his own research. For example, he uses Instagram data to analyze the profile of tourist destinations.

Hannes Gilch: What is the role of an Editor in Chief at a scientific journal?

Prof. Dr. Wolfram Höpken: One important task is to organize the review process. This is a quality assurance procedure that serves to check the technical quality of a submitted manuscript, a submission, before it is published.
We currently receive over 1,000 submissions per year. These must first be reviewed. In desk rejections, Editors in Chief check in the first instance whether the submissions are relevant for the journal and whether the quality level is sufficient. If so, they are passed on to the Associate Editors, who then manage the review process operationally. 
Reviewers are then assigned, who provide feedback accordingly. This all takes place in what is known as the double blind process. This is a form of review process in which neither the authors know who is reviewing their work, nor do the reviewers know who submitted the article. In the end, a decision must be made as to whether the result is suitable and whether it will actually be published. 
Another important task is, of course, developing the journal's strategy, i.e. the content focus. Which IT topics do you want to focus on? All of this has to be managed.

Do the editors meet?

Management is completely online because the team is very interdisciplinary and international. The incoming papers are divided up thematically. Springer has a relatively sophisticated online system through which everything is managed.

How many publications do you work on per semester?

As one of three Editors in Chief, I am responsible for the IT area. I review around 500 to 700 publications a year. Reviewing doesn't mean that you have to read the entire paper. It's only about desk rejection, i.e. the initial assessment of whether the paper is even worth considering. The complete review is done later by the reviewers. But first I have to check whether the paper even meets the minimum standards.

Do people still have to do this?

That's a hotly debated topic. Just like the question of whether authors are not also using AI - possibly even to an extent that is no longer permitted. Or whether completely AI-generated papers will be submitted. Of course, AI can summarize texts nicely, but AI cannot judge whether something makes scientific sense or not. AI is not that advanced yet. So at the moment, it's still up to a human to judge: Is this meaningful research, does it have substance?

How great is this responsibility?

Ultimately, you are responsible for whether research papers are accepted or not. Scientists invest a lot of time, a lot of work. You can't make arbitrary decisions. And you also have some control because you can prioritize topics that will ultimately be published. Of course, this has a certain impact.

Is the operational work comparable to that of a newsroom?

Exactly, we actually work like an editorial office - just on a scientific level.

What language does the editorial team work in?

It's all in English these days. There are hardly any German journals in the scientific field - especially in tourism.

Why is that?

The research community has become so international in all areas that you simply can't reach the entire target group in German.

How do you actually become Editor-in-Chief of a scientific journal?

I've been part of a community that also supports this journal for around 25 years. In 2010, I started working as a member of the Editorial Board, which currently has around 44 researchers on it. I've been Associate Editor since 2019. And now I've become Editor in Chief.

What does this mean for RWU?

It's a highly ranked journal and is ranked in the Q1 sector in several areas. It's not exactly a matter of course for a university of applied sciences professor to become Editor-in-Chief there. This is definitely important for the university's reputation - especially when it comes to demonstrating research strength.

What are you personally researching?

My main areas are data science and data analysis in tourism, i.e. the application of machine learning methods, big data analysis and AI in the tourism sector.
We have already carried out various analyses, for example analyzing Instagram data. We recently published two papers together with students in which we derived destination profiles from Instagram data. We investigated how destinations present themselves with images on Instagram and how people perceive this destination through the images they have uploaded. This allowed us to measure whether the self-portrayal is identical to the perception of others.

How exactly can you measure this difference?

The images are classified into themes that are depicted there, such as nature, water, leisure activities or nightlife. And we did this on both sides: with images uploaded by tourists and with images uploaded by the destinations themselves. This allowed us to compare whether these profiles matched on both sites or whether there was a mismatch.

Can a mismatch also become a recommendation for action?

As a rule, yes. Then it would be a recommendation that the destination should check whether it is advertising the right motifs at all. Perhaps these motifs, which come from the destination, are not really valued by the tourists. In this case, this would be good input for tourism marketing in order to improve marketing activities.
However, a mismatch can also be desirable in individual cases. For example, if Mallorca says it wants to change its tourism profile, it may well be desirable for there to be a mismatch.

Do you think it is possible that such research results could be used to manage tourism?

Absolutely. If I consciously promote other topics, then I could use such techniques to understand very well how strongly these new topics are accepted. At some point, of course, this mismatch should become smaller again. If I consciously promote other topics, the tourists should also follow suit. If they don't, then I realize that these new topics may not be accepted at all.

Why is research fundamentally important for a university of applied sciences?

Students notice whether you are familiar with research. And research is also a very exciting field for students. I think it's important to do research alongside teaching so that as a professor you can also incorporate research findings into your teaching. So the content doesn't just come from textbooks, but also either from practice or from real research findings. That's what makes authentic teaching for me.