Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
11.0 weeks
13.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
Motivation: The review process was smooth, and the Editor handled the paper professionally. Both reviewers gave good, constructive feedback that helped improve the paper.
3.1 weeks
3.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Rejected
Motivation: The review process was very fast and smooth. The reviews were mostly fair and very helpful in identifying places for improvements. The editor handled the review process professionally.
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Drawn back before first editorial decision after 118.0 days
Drawn back
5.0 weeks
9.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
11.6 weeks
11.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Rejected
5.4 weeks
9.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
4
Accepted
8.1 weeks
11.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
8.1 weeks
12.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
Motivation: Excellent all round. Considered and useful reviewer and editorial comments improved the paper. We alo really appreciated the effort made by the copy editor to make sure everything was as clear as possible.
9.3 weeks
14.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
4.3 weeks
8.3 weeks
n/a
4 reports
4
4
Accepted
10.4 weeks
10.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
2
1
Rejected
Motivation: the review process was extremely long.