Follow @scirev on Twitter
Reviews for "American Sociological Review"
| Journal title | Average duration | Review reports (1st review rnd.) |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (click to go to journal page) | 1st rev. rnd | Tot. handling | Im. rejection | Number | Quality | Overall rating | Outcome | Year |
| American Sociological Review | 6.7 weeks |
6.7 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 4 (very good) |
4 (very good) |
Rejected | 2021 |
| Motivation: Lightning fast review times! A very smooth process. However the two reviewers were within a single subfield, which related to our topic but was not the central subfield it was speaking to. | ||||||||
| American Sociological Review | 8.6 weeks |
8.6 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 4 (very good) |
4 (very good) |
Rejected | 2021 |
| American Sociological Review | n/a | n/a | 11.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2021 |
| Motivation: Merely "interesting" and not "ground-breaking" apparently. | ||||||||
| American Sociological Review | 9.3 weeks |
9.3 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 4 (very good) |
5 (excellent) |
Rejected | 2021 |
| Motivation: The manuscript was sent to reviewers very quickly. Although the reviews were mixed, with one proposing minor revisions and others raising issues that could be handled within a revision, the editors explained their rejection well and even proposed a prioritization of the reviewers' comments and suggested outlets to sent the manuscript next to. | ||||||||
| American Sociological Review | 17.7 weeks |
17.7 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 4 (very good) |
3 (good) |
Rejected | 2021 |
| Motivation: Three reviewers indicating excitement about the results and some suggestions for improvement didn't cut it this time. | ||||||||
| American Sociological Review | n/a | n/a | 18.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2020 |
| Motivation: a reject and resubmit because the editors saw the potential but wanted a broader (=longer) engagement with the literature | ||||||||
| American Sociological Review | 5.9 weeks |
5.9 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 4 (very good) |
4 (very good) |
Rejected | 2019 |
| Motivation: Review process was quick and the reviews were of good quality, very methodical. Reviews were very positive so rejection was surprising, but the editor justified it as lack of theoretical development. | ||||||||
| American Sociological Review | 19.4 weeks |
19.4 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 3 (good) |
4 (very good) |
Rejected | 2015 |
| American Sociological Review | n/a | n/a | 5.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2016 |
| Motivation: Very quick desk rejection with appropriate justification. Editors at ASR even took the time to comment on the paper, and suggested alternative publications channels. | ||||||||
| American Sociological Review | 5.0 weeks |
5.0 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 3 (good) |
3 (good) |
Rejected | 2015 |
| Motivation: Fast review procedure, which is much appreciated | ||||||||
| American Sociological Review | 15.1 weeks |
15.1 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 3 (good) |
3 (good) |
Rejected | 2014 |
| American Sociological Review | n/a | n/a | 12.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2014 |
| Motivation: Although it was immediately rejected, the editor explained extensively why it was rejected and gave some useful comments on the script. | ||||||||
| American Sociological Review | 23.7 weeks |
54.1 weeks |
n/a | 4 | 3 (good) |
1 (bad) |
Rejected | 2012 |