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
5.2 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
5.2 months
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
Average number of review rounds
1.0 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
n/a
Average number of review reports
2.0 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
3.0 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
1.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 22.7 weeks. Overall rating: 1 (bad). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
Firstly, I would like to underline that the time was very long. Indeed, I remember that the review process by the reviewers took less than one month but the manuscript stayed a very long time before and after with the editor (4 months in total !). Secondly, if it really was a problem of scope why sending it to reviewers (wasting their time, and mine at the same time), and taking so long to make this decision ? Finally, one of the review was positive (with few changes that we've done since) but the second one was not really constructive.