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
3.8 months
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
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
3.0 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
2.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 10.4 weeks. Overall rating: 4 (very good). Outcome: Accepted.

Motivation:
We proposed the manuscript to the journal (since it is normally by invitation only). Our proposal was swiftly accepted. The review process was quick and reasonable. One reviewer seemed to have been selected from our list of proposals, another seemed totally unconnected. The quality of reviews was not outstanding, but decent. The editors were friendly and encouraging, as well as competent in the field. The whole process was very speedy and we were satisfied with the result. Submission to final decision took about 3 months.