Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
n/a
n/a
20 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2024
Motivation:
It's the second time that this happens to my manuscripts. The editor found a convenient way for desk-rejecting manuscripts. He just tells the submitters he was not able to identify reviewers in time, which gives him justification to reject. The editor then makes it sound like he is doing you a favor by "releasing the manuscript so it can be re-submitted to another outlet." I find this editorial behavior worrying and unacceptable. It will discriminate against under-researched topics or new areas outside of the masses of reviewers. This is clearly anti-science.
19.5 weeks
30.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2013
Motivation:
The topic I discussed was very specific, which made it difficult to find reviewers. The review process was very constructive and it really improved my manuscript.