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
8.6 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
9.0 months
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
Overall rating manuscript handling
4.0 / 5.0

Characteristics of peer review process

Average number of review rounds
2.0 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
4.0 / 5.0 (difficult)
Average number of review reports
3.0 reports
Quality of review reports
4.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 37.1 weeks. Overall rating: 4 (very good). Outcome: Accepted.

Motivation:
The peer review process was somewhat slow; they had to invite nearly 10 reviewers because some declined the invitation or failed to meet the deadline. However, once they received the reviewers’ comments, they were extremely helpful in improving the manuscript. Likewise, the editors provided their own valuable feedback. I think that’s something noteworthy about this journal—that they continued to seek out reviewers. The language editing process was also helpful, and any changes were submitted to me for approval before being implemented.