Journal info (provided by editor)

% accepted last year
1% accepted
% immediately rejected last year
21% imm. rejected
Articles published last year
17 articles
Manuscripts received last year
78 manuscripts
Open access status
optional
Manuscript handling fee
none

Impact factors (provided by editor)

Two-year impact factor
0.74
Five-year impact factor
n/a

Other info -

We have only had an impact factor for four years, so no five-year impact factor yet. The two-year listed one is actually for 2013, because we don't currently have access to two-year one. I will correct it when we do. Desk rejects are mostly for remit; acceptance rate is a rough calculation because we only calculate initial acceptance rate (1.3%) and many manuscripts span a year-change in the revision process. Turnaround time for desk rejects is 7 days; for manuscripts that aren't desk rejects its currently ~67 days. The best way to know about us is to ask - ifjp@ufl.edu.

Duration of manuscript handling phases

Duration first review round
2.0 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
3.5 months
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
Average number of review rounds
2.0 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
2.0 / 5.0 (easy)
Average number of review reports
2.0 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
3.0 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
3.0 / 5.0

Latest review

Outcome: Drawn back.

Motivation:
I want to express my disappointment with the process taking 3 months, which I also find extremely discouraging, considering the unfavourable outcome as l chose to withdraw my manuscript. I can see that the reviewers are very positive; the first reviewer apparently recommended acceptance with brief comments, and the second reviewer elaborated extensively on their comments to further develop the manuscript. In the face of these positive reviews, the editor decided to send the manuscript to another reviewer, who would be commissioned in the unknown future. I can understand that the editor might not find the manuscript publishable for some reason, or simply does not want to take the time to assess it. However, the editor could have given a desk rejection three months ago if they thought so, which would have saved both my and the reviewers' time and labour. This would have been the more respectful option.