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
1.3 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
1.3 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
3.0 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
0.0 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
5.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 5.9 weeks. Overall rating: 5 (excellent). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
The editor was extremely professional and went out of her way to be fair. Although the reviewers rejected the manuscript, the editor allowed us to send a rebuttal. The reviewers were irrational and unwilling to listen to any argument. I think the editor knew that the reviewers were wrong but she couldn't do anything to change the outcome. In my experience, reviewers are always responsible for the current situation in the manuscript review process.