Journal of Affective Disorders

Journal info (provided by editor)

The editor of Journal of Affective Disorders has not yet provided information for this page.

Space for journal cover image
Issues per year
n/a
Articles published last year
n/a
Manuscripts received last year
n/a
% accepted last year
n/a
% immediately rejected last year
n/a
Open access status
n/a
Manuscript handling fee?
n/a
Kind of complaint procedure
n/a
Two-year impact factor
n/a
Five-year impact factor
n/a

Aims and scope

The editor has not yet provided this information.

SciRev ratings (provided by authors) (based on 11 reviews)

Duration of manuscript handling phases
Duration first review round 2.6 mnths compare →
Total handling time accepted manuscripts 4.3 mnths compare →
Decision time immediate rejection 3 days compare →
Characteristics of peer review process
Average number of review reports 2.0 compare →
Average number of review rounds 1.6 compare →
Quality of review reports 3.1 compare →
Difficulty of reviewer comments 2.2 compare →
Overall rating manuscript handling 2.5 (range 0-5) compare →

Latest review

First review round: 19.6 weeks. Overall rating: 0 (very bad). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
My paper was rejected based on a single review report. The reviewer devoted just a few lines to express his/her evaluation, pointing out some issues which could be easily tackled. I am very disappointed about the way in which the manuscript was handled by the associated editor. In the rejection letter he wrote, after more than 4 months from the initial submission, that the manuscript does not fit with the aims of the journal. Before to write this review, I wrote a complain letter to the editor, expressing all my disappointment in receiving just a single (superficial) report review limited to a few lines and in being informed afyer more than 4 months that my manuscript was not appropriate for the aims of the journal. Why didn't he informed me earlier with an immediate rejection? His answer was very generic and he did not reply properly, explianing his choices (e.g., "we receive many papers more competing than yours". Ok, no problems about this, but still, why didn't he reject immediately the manuscript?). I never will submit another manuscript to this journal, there are more professional outlets and it is not my intention to waste further time with unprofessional editors like that.