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
6.5 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
6.5 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
3.0 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
3.5 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 28.4 weeks. Overall rating: 2 (moderate). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
Overall, the experience was a slightly negative one. Mainly because it took way too long to get a review back. It feels as I got the decision right after I contacted the journal to ask about delays. 2/3 accepted, but 1/3 rejected and the editor sided with this reviewer. The accept (with minor revisions) comments were OK, not too much in depth. The one that rejected gave longer motivation and more detailed comments, but felt too strongly about a few aspects. Nevertheless, the paper was improved after the comments and was resubmited to another journal.