Journal title
Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Motivation:
One of the best journals in this field. The process was overall smooth.
Motivation:
The review reports are of good quality overall speaking, and the review process took moderate time length.
Motivation:
The editor handled our manuscript professionally. Comments from the reviewers are very helpful in strengthening the manuscript.
Motivation:
Overall, I was pleased with the process and outcome. Great and personable editor!
Motivation:
Very fast, fair comments. The editor also provided useful comments on the manuscript, and made a very fast decision.
Motivation:
The editor was professional and the reviewer was shown to extract errors in the manuscript.
Motivation:
smooth and fast process with high-quality reports
Motivation:
The editor did not give any comment, fully referring to the reviewers, and did not even sign by name. The reviews were not very critical, but the manuscript was rejected outright. On the positive side, the process was very fast.
Motivation:
The swift communication from editors facilitates a smooth publication journey, while the detailed and relevant feedback from expert reviewers enhances the scholarly value of each article.
Motivation:
Transfered from Advanced science with peer-reviewed comments, we directly submitted revised manuscript to Small. Editor then asked for a minor revision and accepted it.
Motivation:
Handling of manuscript was very good, review time was fast, reviews had a good quality and reviewers were interested in improving the manuscript.
Motivation:
A mini review for the special issue hosted by a colleague, very quick review process and two reviewers showed much interests in our paper. Minor revision has been made before acception by reviewers. APC is discounted. A pleasant publish experience. If APC are lower, i will consider submitting other works to this journal.