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
4.4 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
4.4 months
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
Average number of review rounds
1.0 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
n/a
Average number of review reports
1.5 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
1.5 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
1.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 15.7 weeks. Overall rating: 1 (bad). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
The journal claims a 1st review time of 2.5 weeks, so it came as a great disappointment that the process took four months. In addition, there was only a single reviewer report that was 1 (one) paragraph (and 6 sentences!!). I'm not bothered by the rejection from the journal, as there are many journals with a similar citation score/impact factor, more so that it took months for such lame and poor-quality feedback.