Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement 

The following are the standards of those involved in a publication in "Rechtskultur". These guidelines are based on the Elsevier guidelines and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, which are referred to in a supplementary manner and therefore also claim validity for "Rechtskultur".

Editorial process 

1. Authors may submit a manuscript to [email protected] at any time. Please note the Call for Articles valid at the time. 
2. The editors will review the submitted manuscript for consistency with the theme of the annual Call for Articles and the scientific standards. 
3. If the editors vote in favour of the manuscript, they will notify the author that his or her text will be included in the double-open peer review process.   
4. If the result of the peer review process is positive, the editors forward the reviews to the author and ask for revisions if necessary.  
5 The resubmitted manuscript is reviewed by the editors and, if necessary, adapted to the editorial standards. The author then receives galley proofs.  
6. The paper will be printed in the relevant issue.    

Responsibilities of the editors

The editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted should be published. Submitted manuscripts will be evaluated solely on the basis of their intellectual content. They will be treated confidentially and shared only with all editors, editorial staff and peers. In the event of a conflict of interest, an editor is excluded from the evaluation of the manuscript.  

Peer review process 

The peer review process of Rechtskultur serves solely to ensure quality by assisting editors in their decision to publish a manuscript and by giving the author the opportunity to improve the quality of his or her paper. The procedure is "double open". The authors therefore learn which peers have reviewed their paper, and the peers learn which author wrote the reviewed paper. 
Peer reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest. A reviewer selected referee who feels unqualified to review the paper should notify the editors promptly.  Submitted manuscripts should be evaluated solely on the basis of their intellectual content. 
The reviewers treat the manuscript and their review confidentially. Privileged information obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Each paper is reviewed by two peers.  

Duties of authors

The scientific work of other scientists must always be properly acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. 
Authors should therefore make sure that they have written their work entirely in the original, and if they have used the work of others, that they have cited it appropriately. Plagiarism can take many forms, from "passing off" someone else's work as one's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of someone else's work (without citing the source). 
All persons who have made a substantial contribution should be listed as co-authors, but only those persons.
If an author discovers a substantial error in his/her published work, he/she is obliged to notify the editors immediately.

Allegations of misconduct 

Rechtskultur is committed to upholding the integrity of published articles. By scientific misconduct Rechtskultur understands the intentional and grossly negligent assertion of falsehoods in a scientific context, the violation of intellectual property rights or the obstruction of another person's research. 
If Edition Rechtskultur becomes aware of an allegation of scientific misconduct in connection with an article published in Rechtskultur, it shall take all necessary measures, including the immediate publication of an erratum or, in particularly serious cases, the complete withdrawal of the work in question.