This research explored the criteria that reviewers use in reviewing empirical manuscripts submitted for publication consideration in tourism, travel and hospitality journals. Forty-three reviewers were asked to state the key areas that they look at when reviewing a manuscript. The Nud.ist programme was used in the analysis of their answers. Eight key areas were identified. Reviewers almost always stated the need for the paper to make a contribution. However, they also frequently mentioned being ''innovative or unique''; thus, originality appears to be a significant criterion to many reviewers. Careless writing and presentation appeared to have significant impact on the reviewers' reaction to a manuscript. It is also evident from the comments that the manuscript that leaves ''so what?'' question will not be recommended. Among the other critical elements for the acceptance/rejection decision are the use of literature, quality of arguments, appropriateness in relation to the mission and focus of the journal, research methodology and data analysis, and research implications. The authors aiming to publish may benefit from the study by being cognisant of the reviewers' sensitivities to these aspects.