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
3.6 months
Decision time immediate rejection
12 days
Average number of review rounds
2.0 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
3.0 / 5.0 (moderate)
Average number of review reports
2.0 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
4.0 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
4.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 13.3 weeks. Overall rating: 4 (very good). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
Two reviewers. One pointed out the problems regarding the rationale of the research question, and the comment definitely helped us improve the manuscript before submitting to another journal (accepted after minor revision). However, the other referee quibbled about well-established experimental procedure, which is used by thousands of researchers, without giving any reason. In the decision letter, the editor did not refer to the second reviewer, which I believe is fairly reasonable; but it seemed that SBB does not advance the manuscript unless both reviewers are unequivocally supportive, and therefore the editor did not ask for additional review.