Latest review
First review round: 17.4 weeks. Overall rating: 1 (bad).
Outcome: Accepted.
Motivation:
The reviewers provided good content review, but once the content was set the editor kept asking for minor copyediting changes and requesting changes to the format of the tables. While some of these requests were part of the journal guidelines, there were quite a few that were not explicitly specified in the journal guidelines. Most importantly, the editor kept responding in an exasperated e-tone and in all caps. It was completely unprofessional and rude. In fact, in one instance, when I submitted the final minor changes, the process of uploading it changed it so that a table cell crossed pages and the editor in all caps told me that they had never experienced such inappropriate behavior from an author. Thus, I cannot ever recommend this journal.
