Journal title
Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Journal of the American Chemical Society
6.4 weeks
7.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
Journal of Gerontological Social Work
6.6 weeks
9.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: Overall, this was a positive experience. The paper is stronger as a result of the revisions.
Angelaki
6.9 weeks
6.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: The assignment of the editor, reviewers and all the processes after that were seamless, fast, and friendly.
Ecological Applications
9.7 weeks
9.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
4
Rejected
Motivation: Review process was quick and we regularly received updates on the current status. One of the reviews was very good and helped improve the manuscript.
Biological Invasions
15.3 weeks
21.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: The entire process in this journal takes very long although they are also very generous with the time given to the authors for revising the manuscript. The quality of the reviews was good and the handling editor additionally helped us with their statements (especially concerning contradictory reviewer statements).
Science Advances
8.9 weeks
14.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: Editor should had made the decision after the second round of reviews.
European Sociological Review
12.9 weeks
25.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: Fine handling of the manuscript and reviews from scholars who work on the same topic. Not the fastest review process.
European Journal of Social Psychology
n/a
n/a
30 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Democratization
6.1 weeks
15.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: Pretty smooth process from beginning to end; revisions helped to clarify a few things.
Translational Psychiatry
3.9 weeks
7.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism
n/a
n/a
7 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Molecular Psychiatry
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Nature Communications
n/a
n/a
17 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Psychoneuroendocrinology
10.1 weeks
17.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: Good and helpful feedback from the reviewers, but it took to long for the decisions.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
4.1 weeks
4.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
2
4
Rejected
Psychological Methods
n/a
n/a
22 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Journal of Fish Biology
7.0 weeks
8.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Computer Science and Information Systems
9.0 weeks
16.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
Computers and Electrical Engineering
n/a
n/a
2 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Lancet Public Health
2.3 weeks
4.3 weeks
n/a
6 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: Submission process was smooth even if intense with around 80 questions to answer and many edits to bring to the manuscript. Reviewers comments and questions were excellent.
Editorial team was very kind and considering.
Outcome was approval, so it was a pleasant experience
European Journal of Political Research
13.1 weeks
25.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
3
4
Accepted
Motivation: Competent reviewers, a bit more guidance from the editor could have helped, but in the end we got the paper through...
Acta Psychologica
15.4 weeks
15.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
2
4
Rejected
Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology
8.7 weeks
13.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Acta Tropica
n/a
n/a
3 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications
Immediately accepted after 0.7 weeks
Accepted (im.)
Motivation: The editorial process is extremely swift (accepted in 5 days). The editor carefully checked the manuscript, and provided pros/cons and overall evaluation, successfully satisfying both the scientific validity and the ultra-rapid publication.
Nature Neuroscience
n/a
n/a
6 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
9.0 weeks
12.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
Motivation: Easy process. The first round of reviews was a little longer, but overall we were very satisfied with the quality of the feedback we received.
Baghdad Journal of Biochemistry and Applied Biological Sciences
3.3 weeks
4.7 weeks
n/a
5 reports
4
5
Accepted
Baghdad Journal of Biochemistry and Applied Biological Sciences
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Baghdad Journal of Biochemistry and Applied Biological Sciences
2.9 weeks
3.1 weeks
n/a
4 reports
5
5
Accepted
Journal of Adult Protection
Immediately accepted after 0.4 weeks
Accepted (im.)
Key Engineering Materials
8.4 weeks
10.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
Algal Research
n/a
n/a
5 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Frontiers in Environmental Science
7.0 weeks
12.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: Very fast review process, although, 1 reviewer left the process delaying it for 2 weeks. A new reviewer was found very fast so the process could continue. Paper was improved based on the review-reports.
Elife
n/a
n/a
11 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Mathematical Physics Analysis and Geometry
22.0 weeks
43.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
Motivation: This was really a remarkable experience. The received reviews were of high quality and helped to improve the paper. In particular, incorporating reviewers' remarks has required to change the structure of the paper, which has made it more readable. The whole publication process was unexpectedly fast for a mathematical paper.
energy report
21.7 weeks
27.3 weeks
n/a
4 reports
5
4
Accepted
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies
7.3 weeks
11.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: Similar to previous submissions, decent reviews that were in agreement (makes revisions easier) and helped focus the paper.
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Journal of Physical Chemistry, A
4.6 weeks
7.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
Motivation: Review was reasonably fast, comments are more or less useful. Nevertheless, a quality of the paper has increased after the review.