Journal info (provided by editor)

% accepted last year
n/a
% immediately rejected last year
n/a
Articles published last year
n/a
Manuscripts received last year
n/a
Open access status
n/a
Manuscript handling fee
n/a

Impact factors (provided by editor)

Two-year impact factor
n/a
Five-year impact factor
n/a

Aims and scope

The editor has not yet provided this information.

Duration of manuscript handling phases

Duration first review round
4.0 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
4.5 months
Decision time immediate rejection
339 days
Average number of review rounds
3.0 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
5.0 / 5.0 (very difficult)
Average number of review reports
2.0 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
4.0 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
4.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 17.6 weeks. Overall rating: 4 (very good). Outcome: Accepted.

Motivation:
The reviews were respectfully formulated and provided thoughtful feedback. Altough one point of one of the reviewers was practically infeaseable, the other points were managable critical comments and offered many important suggestions for improvement. The first revised manuscript we submitted exceeded the word limit (due to following extensive suggestions for improvment). The journal has thereupon requested to reduce the word count to comply with the word limit (seems that they are strict with regard to this). It would be nice if the journal would provide more precise information in the "Instructions for authors" which parts of the manuscript file count for the word limit (among other things, it is said title page information is exempt from the word count but not if the abstract is part of the title page information). The speed of the review process was OK, I would consider to publish in this journal again.