Journal title
Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
PLoS ONE
8.7 weeks
14.0 weeks
n/a
4 reports
2
2
Accepted
Sex Roles
19.0 weeks
19.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
2
0
Drawn back
Motivation: The editor had apparently not even read the paper, and provided completely irrelevant feedback (for instance, she wanted us to address issues with using a sample of participants from outside of the US, when in fact the study was on media representations and did not include participant data at all). The reviews were also not attached to the decision letter. When I emailed for confirmation, the editor acknowledged the feedback was for a different paper (??), but said her critique was still valid (???!!). Decided just to submit to another journal rather than deal with with the bizarre requests made by the editor. Several weeks after the correspondence with the editor, we received the actual reviews, which were actually positive.
CLEAN - Soil, Air, Water
10.9 weeks
11.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
4
Accepted
Motivation: It was not bad but the comments of reviewers was not very important and we managed them quickly.Bur publication took longer than reviewing procass.
Psychology of Popular Media Culture
19.0 weeks
35.9 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
3
Accepted
Motivation: We received three reviews, which we addressed in a revision, and the editor said she would send the paper back to one of the original reviewers and no new reviewers, but instead sent it to one original reviewer and two new reviewers. The first round took way too long, but apparently they had issues finding reviewers. I feel the editor should have just accepted the paper after the first round, since the second round didn't contribute much--two of the three reviewers in the second round recommended acceptance, and the other new reviewer made some odd comments based on lack of understanding of the (common) statistical technique we used.
Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications
12.7 weeks
19.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
5
Accepted
European Food Research and Technology
8.7 weeks
8.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry
3.0 weeks
3.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: The review process should be fair and transparent. And the reviewer should give his/her best time to judge the work properly with some positive comments if the research is in positive direction instead of rejection.
Journal of Food Engineering
13.0 weeks
15.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
3
4
Accepted
Sexually Transmitted Infections
5.7 weeks
9.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: Content and editorial reviews were excellent in improving content and language. Adequate reminders were sent regarding re-submission deadline.
AIDS and Behavior
7.1 weeks
11.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: Content and editorial reviews were excellent in improving content and language. Adequate reminders were sent regarding re-submission deadlines.
International Journal of Dairy Technology
15.4 weeks
15.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
4
Accepted
Motivation: The editor provides extensive information of the whole process.

The International Journal of Dairy Technology is included in the electronic service, “e-proofing”.
Food Microbiology
n/a
n/a
9 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Dairy Science and Technology
3.4 weeks
7.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
2
3
Accepted
Motivation: The changes proposed by reviewers were of great importance, but the manuscript was finally accepted
First Language
47.7 weeks
73.8 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
2
Accepted
4.3 weeks
5.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
3.0 weeks
4.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
4
5
Accepted
International Journal of Theoretical Physics
6.0 weeks
9.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
4
4
Accepted
3.0 weeks
3.7 weeks
n/a
1 reports
4
5
Accepted
Annals of Physics
6.0 weeks
8.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
4
4
Accepted
3.0 weeks
3.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
4
5
Accepted
3.0 weeks
5.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
3
4
Accepted
3.0 weeks
3.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
5
5
Accepted
Physics Letters B
n/a
n/a
7 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
ZooKeys
17.4 weeks
43.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
2
1
Accepted
Children and Youth Services Review
8.7 weeks
13.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Talanta
1.0 weeks
14.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
4
Accepted
Motivation: The review report were essential and valuable. The review procedure was relatively fast.
PS: Political Science and Politics
30.0 weeks
30.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
1
1
Rejected
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research
13.0 weeks
13.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
4
5
Accepted
Allergy
11.7 weeks
11.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
17.4 weeks
19.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
5
Accepted
Fuzzy Sets and Systems
21.7 weeks
23.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
Lubrication Science
7.9 weeks
14.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
3
4
Accepted
BBA Proteins and Proteomics
3.0 weeks
5.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Global Social Policy
14.1 weeks
17.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: The process was quite shift and the editor provided helpful comments about how to weigh and address reviewers' comments.
European Polymer Journal
3.6 weeks
4.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
Motivation: The review process was fast and the reviewers comments mostly contributed to improve the article.
Journal of Physical Chemistry, C
13.0 weeks
17.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
4
Accepted
n/a
n/a
5 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Nature Communications
8.7 weeks
16.6 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
5
Accepted
Life Sciences
21.7 weeks
26.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
3
Accepted
American Mineralogist
3.6 weeks
4.3 weeks
n/a
4 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: I was completely satisfied with the Editorial handling of that manuscript. Although it was submitted as a Letter and finally accepted as a Regular Article, the publication process was quick and efficient.