Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
45.9 weeks
84.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Accepted
2024
Motivation:
Reviews very of good quality, but very slow review process. In addition, a minor revision was treated as resubmission and took almost 9 months again to be reviewed (was send out to a new reviewer although same referee and editor could have easily and much more efficiently checked it).
11.7 weeks
23.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2018
Motivation:
One of the first two reviews helped us to improve the paper; this review was done very thoroughly.
n/a
n/a
7 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2016
25.3 weeks
25.3 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Rejected
2014
Motivation:
First, there is no editorial manager web site, the paper should be submitted by email.
The first email received no answer. After 3 days with no answer, I wrote again, and they said they received no email from me. So I sent again the same email, and this time they received it.
Another problem was the long time it took to have an answer: I asked for information after almost 4 months, and they answered that there is still no information. After another 50 days I asked again, with no answer. I asked again after a week, still with no answer.
The first email received no answer. After 3 days with no answer, I wrote again, and they said they received no email from me. So I sent again the same email, and this time they received it.
Another problem was the long time it took to have an answer: I asked for information after almost 4 months, and they answered that there is still no information. After another 50 days I asked again, with no answer. I asked again after a week, still with no answer.