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

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
3.5 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
4.5 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 9.9 weeks. Overall rating: 5 (excellent). Outcome: Accepted.

Motivation:
Two reviewers expressed some doubts but were essentially encouraging. One review was so obnoxious as to prompt a query to the Editor on how to respond to such a discourteous and unprofessional review (s/he used terms like "ignorant", "naïve", "ridiculous", "self-serving" to describe us/our work!). The editor was extremely helpful and responsive in helping us to manage this difficult review. Overall I felt the Ed was not slavishly bound to reviewer recommendations and had sufficient flexibility and knowledge of the field to make a reasoned and rapid decision on our paper.