Journal title
Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms
6.6 weeks
6.6 weeks
n/a
1 reports
5
5
Accepted
Physica B: Condensed Matter
n/a
n/a
9 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Solid State Communications
n/a
n/a
4 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Physics Letters A
6.1 weeks
6.1 weeks
n/a
1 reports
3
5
Accepted
Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms
9.7 weeks
9.7 weeks
n/a
1 reports
5
5
Accepted
Chemical Physics Letters
n/a
n/a
4 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Composites Science and Technology
11.9 weeks
11.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Rejected
Polymer
26.1 weeks
26.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
4
Rejected
Mechanics of Materials
n/a
n/a
14 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Materials Letters
n/a
n/a
2 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Computational Materials Science
n/a
n/a
3 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Computational Materials Science
n/a
n/a
9 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Computational Materials Science
10.1 weeks
12.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
Current Applied Physics
n/a
n/a
3 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Design Studies
27.3 weeks
34.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Applied Thermal Engineering
4.9 weeks
4.9 weeks
n/a
5 reports
4
4
Rejected
Motivation: Reviewer #1: The paper may be accepted for publication by considering the following points
Reviewer #2:It is very interesting and meaningful. But the paper needs to be improved in a more presentable way
Reviewer #3: The results are interesting and meaningful. It has the potential to be published in ATE. But a major revision is required for improvement.
Reviewer #4: some revise
Reviewer #5: After carefully reading and consideration, I don't recommend it being considered to be published.
editor : Therefore I must reject it.
Structural Safety
43.3 weeks
43.3 weeks
n/a
1 reports
0
0
Rejected
Motivation: After 10 months of review process they rejected the paper only with one reviewer comments and the reason was this :"conceptual novelty and thematic balance of the research published in the journal as well as the limitation in number of pages permitted yearly by the publisher"
They could reject within only a week by these reasons not 10 months.
Development and Psychopathology
15.1 weeks
15.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
0
0
Rejected
Biological Psychiatry
4.3 weeks
4.3 weeks
n/a
4 reports
4
4
Rejected
Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
n/a
n/a
9 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Cognition and Emotion
7.9 weeks
12.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
3
Accepted
Neuroscience Letters
1.7 weeks
3.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
3
Accepted
Psychophysiology
3.9 weeks
7.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Cognition and Emotion
10.1 weeks
10.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
4
Accepted
Journal of Abnormal Psychology
8.9 weeks
17.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology
13.6 weeks
13.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
2
2
Rejected
Asian Journal of Control
8.7 weeks
8.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
5
Rejected
Journal of Happiness Studies
24.0 weeks
56.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: It was a long process, but overall the feedback was positive and improved the quality of the document.
Administration and Society
9.3 weeks
22.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: Significant changes needed to be done to the manuscript, but after doing this it was accepted by the reviewers with minor revision.
Agronomy for Sustainable Development
15.9 weeks
23.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
3
Accepted
Motivation: The reviews were helpful and fair, but the review process took longer than most journals.
MicrobiologyOpen
5.3 weeks
7.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
The EMBO Journal
n/a
n/a
5 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Fast and efficient process. A few lines from the Editor showing that the paper was at least quickly read.
Journal of Insect Conservation
8.9 weeks
9.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Asian Journal of Control
8.9 weeks
34.6 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
Motivation: First review process for my paper takes only two months but the revised version was held for more than 6 months. I have found that it was happened for a special issue which made them very busy. In Overall, I like this journal.
Transactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control
2.0 weeks
2.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
3
Rejected
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment
8.4 weeks
11.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
Insect Conservation and Diversity
10.9 weeks
20.9 weeks
n/a
1 reports
2
3
Rejected
Asian Journal of Control
n/a
n/a
42 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Journal of Hydrology
18.1 weeks
18.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
3
Rejected
Asian Journal of Control
12.1 weeks
20.7 weeks
n/a
6 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: The review comment showed that the paper has been investigated by the professional expert in the topic of the paper. Their constructive comments help us to enhance the paper quality greatly.