Science Advances

SciRev ratings (provided by authors) (based on 3 reviews)

Duration of manuscript handling phases		Click to compare
Duration first review round	5.7 mnths	compare →
Total handling time accepted manuscripts	6.2 mnths	compare →
Decision time immediate rejection	10 days	compare →
Characteristics of peer review process		Click to compare
Average number of review reports	3.0	compare →
Average number of review rounds	2.0	compare →
Quality of review reports	4.0	compare →
Difficulty of reviewer comments	2.0	compare →
Overall rating manuscript handling	5.0 (range 0-5)	compare →

Latest review Show all reviews

Outcome: Rejected (im.).

Motivation:
Decision was thankfully very quick and handling editor actually sent some positive feedback. Said that the paper was very interesting but ultimately not broad enough interest for the journal. Gave a few thoughts that came to mind that might improve the discussion. It was nice to get some feedback even though it was ultimately rejected even if for the sole evidence that someone seriously considered it. Editor also gave feedback that they rarely accept science-rejected manuscripts except in situations where; “the paper is excellent but (1) is too long for Science, (2) has important broader impacts even if the science is not transformatory, (3) is excellent but happens to be redundant with a recent publication in Science, or (4) it really needs to be open access” Overall great experience even through disappointing. Would submit again.

Show all »

Related journals

Journal info (provided by editor)

The editor of Science Advances has not yet provided information for this page.

Issues per year: n/a
Articles published last year: n/a
Manuscripts received last year: n/a
% accepted last year: n/a
% immediately rejected last year: n/a
Open access status: n/a
Manuscript handling fee?: n/a
Kind of complaint procedure: n/a
Two-year impact factor: n/a
Five-year impact factor: n/a

Disciplines: General

Aims and scope

The editor has not yet provided this information.