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
4.3 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
4.8 months
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
Average number of review rounds
1.3 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
1.0 / 5.0 (very easy)
Average number of review reports
1.7 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
1.3 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
2.3 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 20.7 weeks. Overall rating: 3 (good). Outcome: Accepted.

Motivation:
The reviewers were not particularly helpful (note: it might be due to sheer chance in reviewer selection this one time, and not reflecting the general quality of reviewers for this journal). The positive review was basically a single paragraph to the effect of "this is a great paper worth publishing". The negative review criticized my draft for presumably failing to address alternative theories x, y, z, all of which I had actually discussed and explicitly refuted in the draft. Luckily the editor was quite reasonable, giving me an opportunity to respond to the negative review, and accepted the draft upon relatively minor revisions.