Reviewing

In order to promote and maintain a high scientific standard of the journal, every article is to undergo a peer review process prior to its publishing in the Germanistische Beiträge.  The peer review is meant to ensure the integrity and high quality of the publication. All the scholars involved in this process are supposed to behave in an ethical and fully responsible manner.

The Germanistische Beiträge is constantly dedicated to transparent policies for its peer review, maintaining a clear and timely communication with the authors and reviewers, in order to get fair, consistent and timely reviews. To achieve these goals, Germanistische Beiträge selects as reviewers experienced scholars in their field of expertise, who are familiar and up-to-date with the publications and scientifical discussions in their particular domain.

In order to assign appropriate reviewers, the editors will match reviewers with the scope of the content of a manuscript to get the best reviews possible. Potential reviewers should provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a fair representation of their expertise, including verifiable and accurate contact information.

 

In order to assure the maximum objectivity of the peer review process, we organize it based on a double-blind model, interacting separately with the authors and the reviewers, and preventing their identification or interaction with one another, preserving maximum confidentiality.

Aiming at the uniformity of the reviewing process, the reviewers are supposed to read and comply with the journal´s guidelines for reviewers.

All reviewers are supposed to sign an agreement, by which they pledge perform the review in the most objective manner possible, to use the provided materials exclusively for the reviewing purpose and to signal any possible conflict of interests. Reviewers are expected  to declare all potential competing, or conflicting, interests, which may be personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political or religious in nature.

They should also perform the review in the given time and provide a reviewer´s report, with their observations and recommendations regarding the article.

Depending on the situation, the article may be accepted as it is, or it may be returned to the author for improvement based on the reviewer´s recommendations or, in the worst case, returned to the author with an explanation for the reasons why it cannot be published in our journal. If the quality of the article is good, but it does not fit into the scope of our journal, the editor may suggest a more appropriate journal for the respective article.

In case of coming across any irregularities with respect to research and publication ethics, the reviewers should let the journal know by contacting the editor directly but he/she should not attempt to conduct his/her own investigation on the case.

Reviews should always follow the journal’s instructions for writing and posting. Reviewers need to be objective and constructive in their review, providing feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript.  Critique needs to be specific and supporting evidence must be provided, with appropriate references to substantiate general statements, to help editors in their evaluation.

Reviewers are expected to provide a fair, honest, and unbiased assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript. The journal allows reviewers to provide confidential comments to the editor as well as comments to be read by the authors.

As long as the article’s style is sound and clear, the author’s style should be preserved.