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
2.7 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
3.7 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
0.0 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
0.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 11.6 weeks. Overall rating: 0 (very bad). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
One reviewer was adamant that the ideas presented were of 'no physiological relevance' and yet did not give concrete suggestions on how to improve the manuscript due to what we believe is an internal bias. This is the rudest and most condescending review I have ever received, and it was clear, to me, that the reviewer did not understand the premise of the experiment, nor read the manuscript in its entirety.