facultas Publication Ethics
facultas makes every effort to ensure high professional and ethical standards in all phases of the publication process and by all parties involved. Our in-house publications (textbooks, reference books, monographs, reference works, journals) are based on international best practice guidelines (Committee on Publication Ethics) and commit authors, editors, proofreaders and reviewers to these standards.
The publisher and the editors decide on the acceptance of submitted manuscripts. Publication decisions can be coordinated internally or with external peer reviewers. Submitted manuscripts should be reviewed promptly and the corresponding decisions communicated without delay.
The publisher and editors undertake not to pass on any information on submitted manuscripts to third parties. Information on manuscripts will only be passed on to the respective authors, responsible or potential reviewers, as well as to associated editorial consultants or editors. The publisher and the editors should not review manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.
Authors should only submit original manuscripts and must declare that they own copyright to all elements of the submitted work and that content from other sources is clearly marked as such. Plagiarism is considered highly unethical. In addition to the individual examination, the publisher may use an automated procedure for the examination of plagiarisms.
Only authors who have made a substantial contribution to the manuscript should be named as authors or co-authors. Participants to a lesser extent should be named as contributors or the like. Authors should not submit manuscripts with essentially the same content to more than one publication unless this is expressly stated and approved. If parts of the manuscript overlap with content already published or submitted, this should be indicated (e.g. by quotation).
Sources of funding (including Open Access funding) should be clearly indicated. Authors undertake to inform the publisher of any material errors discovered in their works after publication and to provide the best possible correction support.
The above principles also apply to peer reviewers, in particular with regard to evaluation criteria and confidentiality of research results. Evaluations should follow objective criteria and clearly identify them. Personal criticism of authors is in any case inappropriate.
Reviewers undertake not to pass on any information about submitted manuscripts to third parties. Information on manuscripts will only be passed on to the publisher or the responsible editorial office.
The aim of the review or expert opinion is to support the publisher or editor in making publication decisions and to assist the author in improving his work. Reviewers who are in delay in reviewing a submitted manuscript should immediately notify the publisher or the responsible editor so that a replacement can be found.
Manuscripts and their contents must be treated confidentially as part of the review process. An exchange with other peer reviewers may only take place if this is approved by the publisher or the responsible editorial department. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.