Reviews for "Ageing and Society"

Average duration			Review reports (1^st review rnd.)
1^st rev. rnd	Tot. handling	Im. rejection	Number	Quality	Overall rating	Outcome	Year
n/a	n/a	35.0 days	n/a	n/a	n/a	Rejected (im.)	2020
31.9 weeks	42.0 weeks	n/a	2	4 (very good)	4 (very good)	Accepted	2019
Motivation: The first review round took a long time, but since I was on maternity leave for most of that time it did not matter so much. Moreover, when I contacted the editorial office to ask them about the progress of my submission, apologies were made and satisfactory explanations given. The review reports I received were very helpful and they really improved the paper.
20.3 weeks	32.7 weeks	n/a	2	5 (excellent)	4 (very good)	Accepted	2017
n/a	n/a	14.0 days	n/a	n/a	n/a	Rejected (im.)	2018
14.6 weeks	23.2 weeks	n/a	2	4 (very good)	4 (very good)	Accepted	2017
Motivation: First round of the review process took a bit long but overall the reviewers provided constructive and helpful feedback.
9.4 weeks	9.4 weeks	n/a	2	3 (good)	3 (good)	Rejected	2017
Motivation: Two reviewers were divided and editor did not want to advise a major revision of the paper.
7.6 weeks	13.9 weeks	n/a	2	4 (very good)	4 (very good)	Accepted	2016
Motivation: It was not the fastest process, but I was very content with the way the journal handled the submission and the quality of the reviews.
17.0 weeks	25.3 weeks	n/a	2	4 (very good)	5 (excellent)	Accepted	2016
Motivation: The process was well organized, although the first review round could have been shorter