Journal info (provided by editor)

Manuscripts received last year
n/a
Articles published last year
n/a
% accepted last year
n/a
Immediately rejected last year
n/a
Open access status
n/a
Two-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
5.1 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
10.0 months
Decision time immediate rejection
97 days
Overall rating manuscript handling
2.6 / 5.0

Characteristics of peer review process

Average number of review rounds
2.2 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
3.5 / 5.0 (difficult)
Average number of review reports
2.0 reports
Quality of review reports
3.4 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 18.4 weeks. Overall rating: 0 (very bad). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
The manuscript was dealing with a controversial topic, which was critical on the government of some countries. In the second round, both reviewers were biased. Political bias and disagreement dominating >80% of the comments, while <20% of the comments window-dressed the review comments appealing to research method (thus making it sound - while every method have got its strength and weaknesses). I made an appeal to the editor, highlighting the ethical issues in the review process (An appeal was allowed according to the website). But the editor provided a generic rejection letter with fairly high rate of GPT-generated (as per GPTZero and ZeroGPT), which made me skeptical on whether he seriously considered my appeal, or he has done his job.