Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
4.9 weeks
4.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2024
12.4 weeks
12.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2023
4.4 weeks
4.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Rejected
2023
5.6 weeks
5.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2021
Motivation:
Roughly one and a half months after submission I got 2 reviews. Reviewer #1 thought that the interpretation of data was incorrect (due to an incomplete understanding of the methodology which is partly my fault for not explaining). Reviewer #2 didn't question the correctness of the methodology, seemed to be aware of the developments in the field, but found the paper not groundbreaking enough for Adv. Sci. Tried appealing but in vain.
As both referees agreed that the work has scientific significance, the editor offered a transfer to 3 journals IF 3-4 which I rejected. I believe that the comments of referees were quite useful as correcting them would really improve the quality of the manuscript and it would get published in a journal with a similar IF like Adv. Sci. The editor was really nice and helpful and really tried finding a place for my work at Wiley.
As both referees agreed that the work has scientific significance, the editor offered a transfer to 3 journals IF 3-4 which I rejected. I believe that the comments of referees were quite useful as correcting them would really improve the quality of the manuscript and it would get published in a journal with a similar IF like Adv. Sci. The editor was really nice and helpful and really tried finding a place for my work at Wiley.
7.0 weeks
7.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2021
Motivation:
The editor was very professional and responsive.
5.9 weeks
8.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2021
Motivation:
Handled in a professional and quick manner. The reviewers' comment were fair, balanced and useful.