The journal Germanistische Beiträge is committed to upholding good scientific practice. The ethical principles to which the editors, authors, and reviewers of the journal aim, were drawn up departing from the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All texts submitted for publication are checked with regard to these ethical principles, honesty, scientific value, and usefulness.
I. The authors are required to only submit their own original texts for publication. When using arguments, research results, and data from other scholars, bibliographical references should be provided for those text passages and/or they should be placed in quotation marks. Misconduct such as plagiarism or data falsification is not permitted. The author also needs to mention what each individual person contributed to the text. The authorship is to be limited to only those persons who actually contributed to the creation of the submitted text (to the development of the arguments, the implementation of research, and to the interpretation of results). Anyone who has made a significant contribution to the text should be named as co-author by the author who submits the text for publication. The author is required to describe his research with honesty and credibility and to interpret his research results objectively. The author must also always indicate the relevant research literature that he has consulted. The author is required to cite all sources of funding and support associated with writing the text. Submitting the same text for publication in multiple publications is unethical and prohibited. The author is required to take into account the changes indicated in the reviews. The author must make the author’s correction in accordance with the editorial guidelines by the deadline set by the editor.
II. The editorial office decides which of the submitted texts will be published or rejected, they are also responsible for all contents of the journal. When deciding whether to accept or reject a text, the following aspects must be taken into account: the scientific relevance of the submitted text, its originality, transparency, and consistency with the thematic profile of the journal, as well as the legal regulations concerning defamation, copyright, and plagiarism. The submitted texts are assessed objectively and factually with regard to their content, regardless of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, nationality, denomination, or political convictions. The editorial office follows the principle of confidentiality, i.e. it does not pass on any information about the submitted texts to third parties. Exceptions are: the author(s) of the text, reviewers, editorial consultants (e.g. language correctors), and editors. The editors may not use unpublished texts or text passages in their own research without the written consent of the author. The editorial team acts against all conflicts of interest and strives to guarantee fair and factual assessments. To ensure that the author remains anonymous when reviewing texts, the editors remove all data that would enable his identification. To ensure that the external reviewers remain anonymous, the editorial team removes their data from the review form. The editorial team, which monitors the principle of scientific integrity and honesty, strives to prevent such cases as plagiarism, ghost-writing and guest authorship. Should any type of misconduct regarding the scientific integrity and honesty occur, the editorial team is obliged to uncover it and notify the relevant authorities in order to take appropriate action in accordance with the applicable law.
III. The reviewer supports the work of the editorial office when it decides whether the submitted texts are accepted or rejected; the recommendations of the reviewer should also help the author increase the scientific quality of the submitted text. Every contribution submitted for publication is assessed by two independent external reviewers. The double-blind procedure ensures that the author and the reviewers do not know each other’s identity. The reviewer is required to make a review on the specified date. If he lacks the time or the appropriate skills, he is required to inform the editorial staff without delay that he is unable to meet the deadline or to provide an expert opinion. In this case, the editorial office appoints another reviewer. The reviewer is required to maintain full confidentiality of the texts entrusted to him for review, which may not be discussed or consulted with third parties. The reviewer must assess the texts entrusted to him objectively and factually, adhering to the ethical principles and providing appropriate scientific arguments. The reviewer may not use the reviewed texts for his own academic work. He should also not review texts that could present a conflict of interest with the author. The reviewer must inform the editorial office about his suspicion of scientific dishonesty (ghost-writing, guest authorship, plagiarism or self-plagiarism/ duplicate publication). For this purpose, he should refer to the corresponding text passage(s).