Filologia Germanica – Germanic Philology is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that is guided by the code of publication ethics developed by COPE: Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. All parties involved [authors, editors, and reviewers] know and share the contents of the code made explicit below.
Decisions on publication
Contributions proposed for publication are first read by at least one member of the editorial board and the Scientific Committee to determine whether the article is suitable for the journal Filologia Germanica – Germanic Philology. The journal only publishes texts that have been judged by two reviewers anonymous external to the Scientific Committee (according to the double blind peer review procedure). The text submitted for evaluation is made anonymous, and the reviewers’ judgment will be forwarded to the author anonymously.
Correctness
Submissions proposed for publication are evaluated on the basis of their content, without discrimination on the basis of race, gender, sexual and political orientation, religion, ethnicity, and citizenship of the authors.
The editor and editorial staff are committed to ensuring the quality of published texts by taking measures to encourage accuracy, completeness and clarity of writings, including through editorial review and the application of appropriate guidelines.
Management is also committed to selecting suitable reviewers, i.e., scholars capable of judging the work to be evaluated and free of vested interests; to ensure that the peer review process is fair, impartial, and timely; and to forward the reviewers’ comments to the authors in their entirety.
The publishing house that edits the publication cannot interfere with the editorial staff’s decisions regarding the choice of articles to publish.
All steps in the review process must be accomplished using the protocol set forth in the journal’s editorial practice to ensure impartiality in the final decision and to ensure that submitted materials remain confidential throughout the evaluation process. The editorial board must carefully consider any criticisms about published work and must not be precluded from publishing research that challenges previously published work. It is also part of the editorial staff’s duties to publish corrections, clarifications and retractions where needed, and apologies when necessary.
Authors must always be given the opportunity to respond to criticism, regarding essays published in Filologia Germanica – Germanic Philology. The journal welcomes contributions that challenge results already published in the journal.
Confidentiality
The Editor and any member of the editorial staff or Scientific Committee agree not to disclose any information about the texts submitted for review by the journal to the exclusion of the corresponding author, or reviewer or potential reviewer.
Conflict of interest
The Editor and any member of the Editorial Board as well as all persons who in various capacities know the content of the proposed articles agree not to use it in their own research without the written consent of the author.
Contribution of the peer reviewer
The peer review process supports the Editor-in-Chief and the Scientific Committee in formulating the decision regarding whether or not to publish the proposed articles. In addition, reviewers may suggest corrections and expedients to the author aimed at improving his or her contribution. The names of the reviewers are listed on the back cover of the volume following the one where the paper in question was published. In the Supplements they appear, from time to time, on the back cover.
Adherence to schedule
If the chosen reviewers do not feel adequate for the assigned task or realize that they cannot carry out the evaluation of the article in the time frame agreed upon in advance, they are required to promptly inform the management.
Confidentiality
Any text assigned for reading should be considered confidential. Therefore, such texts should not be discussed with other people without the explicit permission of the editors.
Objectivity
The peer review process must be conducted objectively. Any personal comments about the author are to be considered inappropriate. Reviewers are required to give adequate reasons for their judgments. They also undertake to point out any errors and suggest improvements.
Bibliographical indications
The auditors also undertake to indicate the bibliographical references of key works overlooked by the author. They must also point out to the Director any similarities or overlaps of the text received for reading with other works known to them.
Conflict of interest and disclosure
Confidential information or guidance obtained during the peer review process must be considered confidential and may not be disclosed or used for personal purposes. Reviewers are required to refrain from accepting for reading articles for which there is a real conflict of interest due to kinship or previous relationship or competition with the author and/or his or her home institution.
Data access and retention
Authors of original research must also make available the sources or data on which the research is based so that they can be retained for a reasonable period of time after publication and possibly be made accessible to others who wish to use the work. False or inaccurate claims constitute ethically unacceptable behavior.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors must guarantee the absolute originality of the texts submitted, and, in the case of using the work and/or words of others, that they have been appropriately referred to or cited.
Multiple, repetitive, and/or competing publications
The author should not publish articles describing the same research in more than one journal. Simultaneously submitting the same text to more than one journal constitutes unethical behavior.
Indication of sources
The author must always provide the correct indication of sources and contributions mentioned or used in the article.
Authorship of the work
The authorship of the proposed text must be properly attributed: all those who have made significant contributions to the conception, organization, elaboration and implementation of the research underlying the essay must be indicated as co-authors. The contribution of those who actively participated in some stages of the research should also be explicitly acknowledged. In the case of contributions written by several hands, the author submitting the text to the journal is required to correctly indicate the names of all other co-authors after obtaining their approval for the final version of the article and consent to its publication.
Conflict of interest and disclosure
All authors must indicate in their manuscript any financial or other conflicts of interest that could be interpreted to affect the results or interpretation of their work. All sources of financial support for the project must be indicated. Authors agree to take into account the reviewers’ comments, rework their essay, and return it to the journal’s editorial office within the agreed time frame. The author must independently arrange for permission to reproduce any copyrighted material; the request should be forwarded to the journal’s editors.
Errors in published articles
If an author identifies a relevant error in his or her published article, he or she is required to promptly inform the editorial staff, providing all necessary clarifications to make the appropriate corrections.
