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.

Latest review

First review round: 9.0 weeks. Overall rating: 4 (very good). Outcome: Accepted.

Motivation:
As participants in a workshop's shared task, we were specifically solicited to submit a journal article for a special issue arranged by the workshop organizers. An earlier version of our paper had therefore already undergone a round of peer reviews for publication in the workshop proceedings. The submission requirements for the journal did not give too much extra space for new material, which probably explains why the reviews we got were fairly positive and did not identify too many areas for improvement. The editors asked us to prepare a camera-ready submission incorporating the reviewers' suggestions (or at least, those that were practical), along with a response to the reviews, but this camera-ready submission was published without going through another round of reviews.