I am honestly disappointed with the editorial handling of my manuscript at Empirical Economics. The decision took a long time, from late March to mid-June, yet the final explanation was quite brief and not fully convincing.
What I find frustrating is that the rejection appears to be based mainly on the argument that the manuscript does not introduce a new econometric technique. However, Empirical Economics is, by its name and scope, a journal associated with empirical research. If the journal gives priority mainly to methodological innovation, this expectation should be communicated more clearly to authors before submission.
I also find the reference to the journal retaining less than 5% of submitted papers unsatisfactory as an explanation. A low acceptance rate should not replace a transparent and detailed assessment of the manuscript’s academic merits.
Overall, the process felt slow, not very transparent, and somewhat inconsistent with what I would reasonably expect from a journal in empirical economics.
