Journal of Rural Studies

Journal info (provided by editor)

The editor of Journal of Rural Studies has not yet provided information for this page.

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

Aims and scope

The editor has not yet provided this information.

SciRev ratings (provided by authors) (based on 8 reviews)

Duration of manuscript handling phases
Duration first review round 3.2 mnths compare →
Total handling time accepted manuscripts 4.7 mnths compare →
Decision time immediate rejection 84 days compare →
Characteristics of peer review process
Average number of review reports 2.7 compare →
Average number of review rounds 1.7 compare →
Quality of review reports 3.7 compare →
Difficulty of reviewer comments 2.5 compare →
Overall rating manuscript handling 3.3 (range 0-5) compare →

Latest review

Outcome: Rejected (im.).

Before submitting our manuscript to JRS, we checked SciRev. When reading the abundance of reviews evidencing the editorial slowness, we were reluctant to send our manuscript to JRS. However, since I had a previous—similarly slow but eventually successful—experience with JRS, we decided to give it a try. After all, we thought that our manuscript provided a very novel and fresh view (don't we all?). After submission, just like the experience of other people on this forum, our manuscript was with the editor for 2.5 months before we decided to send the editor a diplomatic email, basically expressing our understanding that COVID-19 must have been slowing down editorial and reviewer work and even enthusiastically offering our help in reviewing manuscripts. It took the editor another 10 days to look at our manuscript, only to reject it with the typical template response "After careful evaluation, I regret to inform you that your manuscript does not fit within the scope of the journal, and I must therefore reject it." Seriously? Do editors need 12.3 weeks to arrive at this conclusion? This is not acceptable and this not respectful towards the hard work of young researchers who are trying to advance their career. I understand editors' decisions to desk-reject papers. After all, this is a subjective decision and this editor may have no affiliation for our particular research discovery, but I think editors should be able to reach this decision faster, such that we can explore other journals without wasting valuable time by waiting.