Journal title
Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Motivation:
excellent
Motivation:
Published twice on the journal. First time the editors were very active and up to their job; got the reviews back quickly as well as a reasoned decision. When submitted the second paper the editors had changed. The process was considerably slower and the editors seemed to have hard time in making the final decision.
Motivation:
The referee based on its "eventual" experience did not believe the results. Only after same mails directly with the editor the manuscript was accepted.
Motivation:
Evaluations were made to improve the quality of the manuscript. A reviewer in particular has very interesting suggestions on chemometric tools used, worthy of a participant co-authored the article. We were very pleased.
Motivation:
Failed to inspire the reviewers, and apparently failed to communicate clearly as most of the points criticized are actually in the manuscript. Standard handling of the manuscript.
Motivation:
It is excellent journal in its impact and discipline.
Motivation:
Reviews from this journal although takes long are very constructive
Motivation:
As soon as the comments by the reviewers were addressed to then the manuscript was accepted
Motivation:
Failed to inspire the reviewers, and then one of the reviewers suggested rejection because of many minor issues. Comments are to the point and will help strengthen the paper.
Motivation:
All the reviews were aimed at improving the quality of the manuscript.
Motivation:
The review process was fair and fast
Motivation:
The review process and publication with Elsevier was outstanding.
Motivation:
although it took some time, but the reviewers were very accurate, and the review process was smooth and justified.
Motivation:
I had a very positive and productive interaction with the editorial office, especially with the processing of figures
Motivation:
I took reviewers comments very positively and these were genuine in order to improve the manuscript. I appreciate journal policy and editor's response in this regards, and publishing team also was very helpful