Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The purpose of Anglisticum Journal (AJ) is to publish articles relevant to field of English Literature, Linguistics and Interdisciplinary Studies.

The field of Literature includes American Literature, Eighteenth Century Literature, Literary Theory, Medieval Literature, Renaissance Literature, Romanticism, Seventeenth Century Literature, Shakespearean Literature, Victorian Literature, Twentieth Century and Contemporary Literature, Comparative Literature, etc.

The field of Linguistics includes Applied Linguistics, Language Teaching, Computational Linguistics, Discourse Analysis, Historical Linguistics, Psycholinguistics, Language Acquisition, Sociolinguistics, Bilingualism, Language and Gender, Language Variation and Change, Speech Science, Perception, Theoretical Linguistics, Morphology, Phonology, Phonetics, Pragmatics, Semantics and Syntax.

The field of Interdisciplinary studies includes Creative and Performing Arts, Humanities, Science, Social science.

The disciplines most commonly associated with the Creative and Performing Arts are: Creative Writing, Film (production), Music (performance), Theatre Design and Production, Visual Art.

Among the Humanities disciplines are: Archaeology, Art History, History, Language, Linguistics, Literature, Philosophy, Religious Studies, Women’s Studies.

In the science category are included: Astronomy, Atmospheric Sciences, Biochemistry, Biology, Animal Biology, Cell and Developmental Biology, Conservation Biology, Ecology and Environmental Biology, General Biology, Genetics, Geographical Biogeosciences, Marine Biology, Plant Biology, Chemistry, Computer Science, Earth and Ocean Sciences, Geological Sciences, Geophysics, Oceanography, Mathematics, Microbiology, Nutritional Science, Pharmacology, Healthcare, Sports, Physiology, Physics, Psychology, Statistics.

The disciplines most commonly associated with the Social Sciences are: Anthropology, Economics, Family Studies, Geography, Political Science, Psychology, Sociology, Urban Studies, Women’s Studies.

Its editorial team will consider academically robust papers and will welcome Editorials, Letters to the Publisher, Research Articles, Case Studies, Reflective Essays, Review Articles, Research Briefs, Policy Briefs, Conference Proceeding and/or Abstracts, Commentaries, Viewpoints and other work which are of scientific value and interest.

All papers are double-blind peer reviewed and are checked with TURNITIN software.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Types of Submissions

In an effort to accommodate the vast array of needs and interests, ANGLISTICUM – International Journal for Literature, Linguistics & Interdisciplinary Studies accepts a wide range of manuscript types, such as:

Editorials (up to 500 words; not peer reviewed)

Editorials provide commentary by the publisher, members of the Editorial Committee (advisors and reviewers), and others related to the Journal's mission as well as the general interest to our readers. Unsolicited editorials will be considered for publication. Acceptance will reside with the publisher and managing editor.

Letters to the Publisher (up to 500 words; not peer reviewed)

Letters to the Editor simply address matters of general interest to the readership. Letters are reviewed by the publisher and managing editor and are subject to editing and possible abridgment. Letters to the Editor should not include original, unpublished data.

Research Articles (up to 8,500 words; peer reviewed)

Research articles present important new research results including the entire contents of a research project. Quantitative studies include statistical analysis of survey or secondary data. Qualitative studies include case studies, focus groups, or interviews, and the like. Research articles generally include an abstract, an introduction, methods and results sections, a discussion, and relevant citations. Authors of research articles are required to adhere to our policy of accessible scholarship.

Case Studies (up to 5,000 words; peer reviewed)

A case study is a report of a single case (generally deemed 'interesting' or 'unusual'). These studies usually are generated by the author’s actual experience or objective observations. This is a popular form of manuscript among practitioners. It is critical that the case study be objective and not promotional. The case should feature a new program approach, best practice, or organizational structure. It should present sufficient references to previous studies of the issue the case is focused on to embed (provide context) for this new case study to build on.

Reflective Essays (up to 5,000 words; peer reviewed)

A reflective essay is a critical reflection on one’s work or the work of one’s organization related to a specific issue or strategy. It is similar to a case study but it is a more personal slant and subjectivity. This is material which might have a more popular journalistic style but also has much deeper substance than a trade journal article. These could take the form of a case study, a project post-mortem analysis (why a project failed), a policy commentary, a position paper on a best practice, or even a proposal for a new strategy, technique, or approach.

Review articles (up to 8,500 words; peer reviewed)

Review articles do not cover original research but rather accumulate the results of many different articles on a particular topic into a coherent narrative about the state of the art in the emerging field food systems and agricultural development. Review articles provide information about the topic and also provide journal references to the original research.

Research Briefs (up to 2,500 words; peer reviewed)

A research brief is generally an update of ongoing research of national or international significance. It is typically a follow-up to a research paper already submitted, but may also be a paper providing preliminary findings of a new study. Research briefs may be fast-tracked for immediate publication because they are considered urgent.

Policy Briefs (up to 2,500 words; peer reviewed)

A policy brief is a thorough analysis of a proposed, new, or existing government or organizational policy which focuses on the background of a policy issue, the details of the policy, and its real or predicted impacts on the issue. Like research briefs, policy briefs may be fast-tracked for immediate publication because they are considered urgent.

Conference proceeding and/or abstracts (up to 8,500 words; not peer reviewed)

Proceedings provide short summaries of in-progress or completed primary studies that are presented at conferences, but are not yet fully peer-reviewed for publication as complete articles. Conference proceeding and/or abstracts thus provide an 'early picture' of current research that is likely to appear later in one or more of the primary article forms listed above. Because selection processes are highly variable, the quality of conference proceeding and/or abstracts vary widely.

Commentaries (up to 1,000 words; rebutted; not peer reviewed)

Commentaries are reactions or viewpoints based on papers of unusual interest published in the journal. They should describe the most important conclusions of the paper they are commenting on; place the paper into context with the current state-of-the-art; highlight controversial issues; when relevant, denote strengths and weaknesses of the paper; and review questions that remain to be addressed. If a commentary is found acceptable, a copy will be sent to the author of the original article, if applicable; that author will have an opportunity to provide a rebuttal with new material that will be considered for publication with the letter.

Viewpoints (up to 1,500 words; rebutted; not peer reviewed)

Viewpoint articles are intended to present an insightful, thoroughly documented slant on a topic for which opinions are either controversial or undecided in the literature. The hope is that the readership will benefit from a new unconventional viewpoint on a topic. In addition, brief commentary (250 words, 5 references) will be solicited from the readership. The hope here is to use the journal to promote communication among practitioners and researchers, and therefore further understanding. Hopefully, new ideas and improved designs for future research on these topics should follow. Some articles will be invited; we also welcome unsolicited manuscripts. The Viewpoint manuscript must be concise, to the point, and bring novel new insights on a specific problem. Refer only to already peer-reviewed, published findings. Abstract is required; the title of the manuscript should be as descriptive as possible of the problem and or viewpoint being presented. Authors should provide a list of 5-10 names and emails of individuals who may be interested in providing commentary on their Viewpoint.

Section Policies

Volume 7, No.1, January, 2018

Open Submissions

Once a manuscript is submitted, it is assigned to an Editor most appropriate to handle it, based on the subject of the manuscript and the availability of the Editors. If the Editor determines that the manuscript is not of sufficient quality to go through the normal review process or if the subject of the manuscript is not appropriate to the journal scope, the Editor rejects the manuscript with no further processing.

If the Editor determines that the submitted manuscript is of sufficient quality and falls within the scope of the journal, he/she assigns the manuscript to a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 5 external reviewers for peer-review. The reviewers submit their reports on the manuscripts along with their recommendation of one of the following actions to the Editor:

Accept submission (Publish Unaltered)
Revisions required (Consider after Minor Changes)
Resubmit for review (Consider after Major Changes)
Decline submission (Reject: Manuscript is flawed or not sufficiently novel)

When all reviewers have submitted their reports, the Editor can make one of the following editorial recommendations: Publish Unaltered, Consider after Minor Changes, Consider after Major Changes, Reject.

If the Editor recommends "Publish Unaltered," the manuscript is accepted for publication.

If the Editor recommends "Consider after Minor Changes," the authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the required minor changes suggested by the reviewers. The Editor reviews the revised manuscript after the minor changes have been made by the authors. Once the Editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript can be accepted.

If the Editor recommends "Consider after Major Changes," the recommendation is communicated to the authors. The authors are expected to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the changes recommended by the reviewers and to submit their revised manuscript in a timely manner. Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the Editor can then make an editorial recommendation which can be "Publish Unaltered" or "Consider after Minor Changes" or "Reject".

If the Editor recommends rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. Also, if two of the reviewers recommend rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. The editorial workflow gives the Editors the authority in rejecting any manuscript because of inappropriateness of its subject, lack of quality, or incorrectness of its results. The Editor cannot assign himself/herself as an external reviewer of the manuscript. This is to ensure a high-quality, fair, and unbiased peer-review process of every manuscript submitted to the journal, since any manuscript must be recommended by one or more (usually two or more) external reviewers along with the Editor in charge of the manuscript in order for it to be accepted for publication in the journal.

The peer-review process is double blinded, i.e., the reviewers do not know who the authors of the manuscript are and the authors do not have access to the information of who the peer-reviewers are. Without the significant contributions made by peer reviewers, the publication of the journal would not be possible.

Publication Frequency

Anglisticum Journal is published monthly both in its online and printed editions. However, accepted papers are published online, as soon as the corrected proofs are available, prior to print publication.

Disclaimer: Articles appearing in the published ahead-of-print section are posted at the "Post Author Correction" stage of production. A Post Author Correction article is a composed proof of a peer-reviewed article that has been substantively edited and copyedited, and it contains the author's and editorial office's proofreading corrections. However, these articles will be reviewed one additional time before print publication. Any final changes in the manuscript will be made at the time of print publication and will be reflected in the final electronic version of the issue. Anglisticum Journal, the editors and editorial board members are not responsible or liable for the use of any potentially inaccurate or misleading data, opinion, or information that may be contained within the articles found in the published ahead-of-print section of the Anglisticum Journal Web site.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

License

Association-Institute for English Language and American Studies & Anglisticum Journal provides open access to works we publish on the principle of the Creative Commons Licence 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. View Legal Code Under this license, we require publishing rights from authors to publish and disseminate their research articles, while authors retain ownership of the copyright in their works. This allows anyone to download, print, distribute, reuse, modify and copy the content without requesting extra permission from the authors or the publishers only if appropriate credits are given to the original authors and source.

Retraction Policy and Instructions

ANGLISTICUM Journal ONLY retracts articles for the following TWO reasons:

1. The authors admit that there is a conflict of interests, and/or duplicate submissions to multiple journals at the same time and/or plagiarism in this article. In this case,

The administrator of the authors’ institute should be notified and he/she needs to send an official letter to the editor-in-chief indicating that he/she knows the issue.
The administrator of the authors’ institute should show the evidence that there are steps to against this issue with the signature of the school administrator.
This letter must be sent from the administrator’s school official email address to the editor the journal and the authors at the same time.
The retraction process is irreversible, which means if an article is retracted, it won’t be able to appear again in the journal in future.

2. The authors insist on retracting the article, due to personal reasons and there’s a 122 EUR / article processing charge.

The authors should write a letter with all the signatures indicating that they would like to retract the article due to personal reasons and they are sure that there isn’t any conflict of interests and/or plagiarism in this article and they understand that the retraction will make the journal incomplete.
The authors need to provide the payment receipt of the processing charge to the editor.

Special Editions (Conference Proceedings)

Our journal publishes Special Editions and the publication fee will be discussed with institutions based on their requests.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

ANGLISTICUM publication ethics and malpractice statement has been written in accordance with COPE general guidelines http://publicationethics.org/.

ANGLISTICUM is dedicated to following best practices on ethical matters, errors and retractions. The prevention of publication malpractice is one of the important responsibilities of the editorial board. Any kind of unethical behavior is not acceptable, and ANGLISTICUM does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors submitting articles to ANGLISTICUM affirm that manuscript contents are original. Furthermore, they warrant that their article has neither been published elsewhere in any language fully or partly nor is it under review for publication anywhere.

Publication decisions

The editors of ANGLISTICUM are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editors are guided in reaching their decision by referees’ reports and may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. They are also guided by the journal’s policies and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

Fair play

All manuscripts will be reviewed based on intellectual content without regard for age, gender, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, country of origin, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted for peer-review are kept strictly confidential. The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisers, as appropriate. At no time will editors or reviewers utilize submitted materials without the consent of the authors.

Fundamental errors in published works

When a significant error or inaccuracy has been discovered in a published work (with or without the author notifying it), the journal editors will cooperate with the author to retract or correct the paper accordingly. If a correction is deemed appropriate, the editors reserve the right to correct the published material and include a dated erratum.

Dealing with unethical behavior

When dealing with unethical behavior, the Editorial Board will rely on the guidelines and recommendations provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Retraction Policy

ANGLISTICUM follows COPE Retraction Guidelines.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.

*Editors should be ready to justify any important deviation from the described process. Editors should not reverse decisions on publication unless serious problems are identified.

*Editors should publish guidance to both authors and reviewers on everything that is expected of them. This guidance should be regularly updated and will refer or link this code.

The following duties outlined for editors, authors, and reviewers developed based on the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors.

Human and Animal Rights

A suitable ethical framework must have been followed during the conduct of all study. Editors may reject the submission and/or get in touch with the author(s)' ethics committee if they have reason to believe that the work has not been done in accordance with relevant ethical standards. Rarely, even after receiving permission from an ethics committee, a paper may still be rejected on ethical grounds if the editor has serious reservations about the study's ethics.

A statement in compliance with the animal and human ethics committee should be included in any articles involving clinical or animal research.
All clinical studies must be registered, and research should be conducted in a way that avoids unnecessarily harming animals.

Informed consent

Participants in ANGLISTICUM have a right to privacy that should not be compromised without their knowledge. Unless the material is necessary for scientific research and the patient (or parent or guardian) provides written informed consent for publication, identifying information, such as names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be released in written descriptions, images, or pedigrees. An identified patient must be shown the article before it can be published in order to receive informed consent for this purpose. If any potentially identifying information may be made available after publication both online and in print, authors should inform these individuals. Patient consent should be written and archived either with the journal, the authors, or both, as dictated by local regulations or laws. Nonessential identifying details should be omitted. Informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt that anonymity can be maintained. For example, masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, such as in genetic pedigrees, authors should provide assurance, and editors should so note that such alterations do not distort scientific meaning. When informed consent has been obtained, it should be indicated in the published article.

Data sharing policy

ANGLISTICUM is dedicated to a more transparent research environment, accelerating and improving research discovery by enabling the replication and validation of data, methodologies, and reporting standards. We encourage researchers to share their research data, including but not limited to: raw data, processed data, software, algorithms, protocols, methods, and materials, in publications that are published in our journals.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors of ANGLISTICUM should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Authors of work

Author of the paper should be the person who made the greatest contribution to the creation of the work. All those who contributed to the making of the work should be listed in the paper and as co-authors. If there are other contributors who took part in the preparation of making the same work should be listed or admitted as associates.

Before accepting a final version of the paper for publication is necessary that the author and all co-authors approved the final version.

Changes in Authorship

Privacy change in authorship relates to the addition, deletion, or rearrangement of author names in the accepted version of the paper. An amendment to the data on the authors or co-authors is not possible after acceptance and publication in the online version.

If there is a need to amend the information on the authors, it is necessary to state the following:

The reason for the addition or deletion of the author,
A written confirmation (send it scanned by e-mail) where all the authors agree that the notified operation is a named person is added or removed from the list of authors.
The editor will notify the author that needs to be added or removed from the list and will ask for his consent.

Requirements that are not sent by the respective author (corresponding author) will not be considered.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors are required to submit an original written article. If other work necessary to work properly quote according to the instructions on the citation of work. If you use ideas of other authors require their written consent and using the same.

Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behavior and will be severely punished, and as such is unacceptable. The author or authors are required before reporting to work in the journal checking their work through some of the programs for testing against plagiarism. The Editorial Board reserves the right to verify each work through the test of plagiarism and if the same occurs to notify the author.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Disclosure and conflicts of interest can be multiple. If the author or institution where the author has financial assistance in project design or research is needed to adequately cover letter to inform the editorial and the public. Publication in journal person or institution that is financially supported by the making of the work or project is the best way to protect against conflicts of interest.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If the author detects an error in the published paper is obliged to instantly inform journal editors or publishers and that as soon as possible about the same document. The author shall, in the event of an error, to cooperate with the editorial board to remove the same.

Copyright

The Author(s) warrant that their manuscript is their original work that has not been published before; that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere; and that its publication has been approved by all co-authors, if any, as well as tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities at the institution where the work was carried out. The Author(s) affirm that the article contains no unfounded or unlawful statements and does not violate the rights of others. If copyrighted works are included, the Author(s) bear the responsibility to obtain written permission from the copyright owners. The Corresponding author, as the signing author, warrants that he/she has full power to make this grant on behalf of the Author(s).

Important Notes:

- Publishers and editors take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred.

- In no case shall a publisher or editors encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

- In the event that a journal’s publisher or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct the publisher or editor will deal with allegations appropriately.

- The journal has guidelines for retracting or correcting articles when needed. For more info see: https://anglist.bdtopten.com/index.php/IJLLIS/about/editorialPolicies#custom-1

- Publishers and editors always are willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Publisher

- The publisher undertakes to have an independent editorial decision made.

- Editors are responsible for all the processes that the manuscripts submitted to ANGLISTICUM will go through. Within this framework, ignoring the economic or political interests, the decision-makers are the editors.

- The publisher bears all the responsibility to take the precautions against scientific abuse, fraud and plagiarism.

- In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

Indexed / Abstracted in

Indexed / Abstracted in

ANGLISTICUM is indexed and abstracted in the following databases/resources:

Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
EBSCO Essentials
Scilit
EuroPub
Index Copernicus (ICI)
National and University Library "St. Clement of Ohrid" - Skopje, North Macedonia
Thomson Reuters Researcher ID
PUBLONS
BASE
Google Scholar
abcGATE
Zenodo
WorldCat
Directory of Research Journal Indexing (DRJI)
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
InnoSpace (Innovative Space of Scientific Research)
Scholar Steer
Scientific Indexing Services (SIS)
International Scientific Indexing (ISI)
Eurasian Scientific Journal Index (ESJI)
Open Academic Journals Index (OAJI)
ResearchBib
SSRN
The State and University Library of Hamburg
PKP Open Archives Harvester
IBI factor
Semantic Scholar
International Society for Research Activity (ISRA)
Advanced Science Index

Other relevant resources

Saarland University
Technical University of Darmstadt
Marburg University
The LEIPZIG University Library
The library of the University of Applied Sciences Wildau (TH Wildau)
The Saxon State Library - Dresden State and University Library (SLUB)
Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek. (EZB)
The Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB)
Zeitschriftendatenbank (ZDB)
Fulda University
University of Rheinmain
WZB library
University of Giessen
Technische Hochschule Nürnberg Georg Simon Ohm
Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences
University of Passau
University of Applied Science Amberg Weiden
Hochschule Augsburg
Hochschule Rosenheim University of Applied Sciences
Technische Hochschule Mittelhessen
Darmstadt University of Applied Sciences
“Weihenstephan Triesdorf” University of Applied Sciences
Eichstatt Ingolstadt University
Kassel University
Bavarian State University
University of Bayreuth
Iseek
Leibniz Information Centre for Life Sciences
PBN (Polska Bibliografia Naukowa)
POL-Index (Polska Baza Cytowan)
CiteULike
Issuu
Microsoft Academic Search
International Organization for Impact Factor and Indexing
Open AIRE

ANGLISTICUM is under the review of SCOPUS, The Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), ERIH PLUS, Econ Biz (Virtual library for Economics and Business Studies, Germany).