My experience with the review process was disappointing, primarily because of the length of the process and the lack of clear communication. I submitted the manuscript in January 2026, and 2 reviews were received by August 2026. After that, the editor sought an additional reviewer, but no third reviewer was secured over by October 2026, after which I decided to withdraw my manuscript.
During this period, I made repeated attempts to obtain clarification about the manuscript's status, and the expected timeframe. These attempts did not result in a substantive response or a clear indication of when a decision could be expected. The communication with editorial office was quite frustrating. I wrote to EIC, but he did not reply. I tried to find out who the handling editor was, but the editorial office refused to reveal this. After 10 months, I withdrew the manuscript, after which the journal subsequently issued a rejection (rather strange decision as I was the one who withdrew it).
I am aware that securing suitable reviewers can be difficult and that editors may reasonably seek additional opinions. However, my frustration grew from the inadequate and unprofessional communication. More timely editorial assessment and more transparent communication about delays would have made this a considerably better experience.
