Journal title
Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
International Journal of Robotics and Automation
8.4 weeks
12.9 weeks
n/a
3 reports
3
4
Accepted
Motivation: Editors tried to speed up the review process as possible but the journal does not publis the paper online before printing.
PNAS
4.1 weeks
4.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: very professional review process with real experts in the field and a fast and fair editorial assessment. Great layout service.
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
3.0 weeks
5.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: High quality journal with expert reviewers and very experienced editorial board. Every manuscript accepted receives moreover an editorial which significantly increases the visibility of the work.
Dalton Transactions
4.1 weeks
5.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Applied Catalysis, B: Environmental
4.0 weeks
7.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
Optical Engineering
5.1 weeks
6.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: The review process was excellent. The editor was helpful and the reviewer's comments were understandable. The speed of the processes and reply times to further questions was very good.
European Heart Journal
2.0 weeks
2.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
5
Accepted
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
8.7 weeks
9.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
3
Accepted
Motivation: The overall review process was relatively quick. The comments of the reviewers were, in my opinion, valid but polite.
Social Justice Research
10.6 weeks
18.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
4
Accepted
Current Gene Therapy
8.7 weeks
9.1 weeks
n/a
1 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: Current gene therapy is a good journal.
Immediately accepted after 14.0 weeks
Accepted (im.)
Angewandte Chemie
2.0 weeks
3.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
4
Accepted
BMC Public Health
30.4 weeks
31.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
3
Accepted
Chemical Engineering Journal
2.0 weeks
3.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Oncogene
5.7 weeks
10.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: Oncogene is a very good journal in regards to scientific information. The journal handles the article very sincerely without any bias and the reviewers read the article very carefully. The time from submission to acceptance is also very reasonable but takes long to put on the pubmed. I would like to communicate my articles to this journal in future too.
Oxford Economic Papers
n/a
n/a
36 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Kyklos
26.0 weeks
47.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: The reviews were generally good taking into account that the paper was highly specialised. I feel that one of the proposed changes was unnecessary
Molecular Therapy
3.0 weeks
4.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
4
5
Accepted
Catalysis Today
6.4 weeks
19.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
3
Accepted
Interlending and Document Supply
8.7 weeks
8.7 weeks
n/a
0 reports
n/a
5
Accepted
BMC Oral Health
3.0 weeks
11.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Ecological Indicators
26.0 weeks
26.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: In my experience it was a really fast process with excellent reviewers
Ecological Modelling
13.0 weeks
13.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Rejected
Optics Express
2.9 weeks
3.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
Optics Letters
19.3 weeks
19.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Biological Conservation
n/a
n/a
14 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Two weeks was a long time to wait for a reject without review decision.
Ionics
4.9 weeks
5.9 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
5
Accepted
Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal
52.1 weeks
56.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
5
Accepted
Journal of Physical Chemistry, C
2.5 weeks
2.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: After publishing in several other journals, the overall experience in working with JPC-C was eye-opening. Not only were the referee reports in total, as well as their criticism relevant (something that can sadly not be expected from certain other journals), but they also arrived fast. Interaction with the editing staff was flawless and uncomplicated.

I can only recommend JPC-C to everyone.
Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews
2.0 weeks
2.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: The whole process went fast and smoothly. The comments from the reviewers were fair and constructive and helped improve the manuscript.
Geothermics
26.0 weeks
34.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
3
Accepted
Journal of Physiology
4.3 weeks
7.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
3
Accepted
Plasmonics
8.7 weeks
8.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: The review process is very quick
Applied Physics A: Materials Science and Processing
13.0 weeks
17.4 weeks
n/a
1 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: In my opinion review process is good
Angle Orthodontist
15.2 weeks
16.2 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
Motivation: I was very impressed by their way of editing, cooperation and consultation, they give solutions to any problem that I was having for example they asked whether I would rather pay for the color figures or put in black and white and gave me some similar histological figures with black and white to see IF I AGREE with that
The process was rather fast and the comments was valuable and realistic
Such a respectful journal
Applied Physics Letters
3.0 weeks
3.7 weeks
n/a
1 reports
4
4
Accepted
Journal of Environmental Radioactivity
9.9 weeks
10.9 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
Environmental Science and Technology
10.4 weeks
10.4 weeks
n/a
4 reports
3
3
Accepted
Motivation: In the first submission (not reported here) the first editor handled the manuscript made his/her decision to reject our paper trusting only on one of the 3 reviewers' comments. I replied to the editor that her/his way to handle the review process was not the rigth way (I'm editor too) and I explained why he/she could not trust just on the comment of one reviewer who did not support his/her remarks with scentific literature references. Finally, the editorial staff made the decision to change handling reviewer and riconsider our manuscript for possible publication. This time the paper was sent to 4 new reviewers and accepted for publication after major revisions.
IEEE Transactions on Multimedia
8.7 weeks
17.4 weeks
n/a
4 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: The review report was comprehensive. This allowed me to address the issues with the paper and so my experience was very positive with the review process.
Once, I addressed the issues the manuscript was accepted. I was very pleased with how the editor dealt with the whole review process.
International Journal of Bilingualism
5.0 weeks
6.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: In their comments, the reviewers demonstrated that they know the topic and latest tendencies in the research very well. All the comments were well-formulated, up-to-the-point and constructive.