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
8.5 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
13.9 months
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
Average number of review rounds
2.0 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
3.0 / 5.0 (moderate)
Average number of review reports
5.5 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
3.5 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
1.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 63.6 weeks. Overall rating: 2 (moderate). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
The journal took 15 months and went through 4 rounds of external review, only to ultimately reject the manuscript. It was an incredible waste of time. After three rounds of major revisions, all reviewers agreed the paper was ready for publication—except for one reviewer. He rejected it twice, and on the third round, claimed that his expectations had now increased, bringing up completely new concerns that had never been mentioned before. This is utterly unreasonable. I strongly discourage anyone from submitting to this journal. Four rounds of review is an unacceptable burden and a form of academic exhaustion.