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
2.2 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
4.3 months
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
Average number of review rounds
2.0 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
4.0 / 5.0 (difficult)
Average number of review reports
4.0 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
2.0 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
2.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 9.6 weeks. Overall rating: 2 (moderate). Outcome: Accepted.

Motivation:
This paper was assigned to three reviewers, and in addition it was reviewed by the associate editor as well. Some of the reviews reflected personal opinions rather factual errors. Indeed, I later realized that the published paper contains some typos in one of the formulas. I wished the reviewers were more attentive to that, rather than pushing their own philosophy. Moreover, having 3+1 reviewers means a lot of constituencies to satisfy.