Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
Immediately accepted after 6.7 weeks
Accepted (im.)
2015
Motivation:
I have received excellent detailed feedback from the editor I contacted and from another member of the editorial team of the journal, which improved my piece greatly. Since then, I have published another article with them, with a similar experience.
Immediately accepted after 50.6 weeks
Accepted (im.)
2016
Motivation:
When I first sent the article, I received helpful preliminary feedback from the journal editor, but for some reason my article was not then forwarded to the editorial board for review. I only found out about this 8 months later when I enquired the editor about the matter. I received due apology and the subsequent review process was relatively swift and, as ever, courteous.
Immediately accepted after 10.1 weeks
Accepted (im.)
2016
Motivation:
As far as I know, the article wasn't sent for an external anonymous review, and hence I didn't receive any feedback or suggestions for improvement—apart from a few editorial notes and corrections on the already accepted draft. I think the article would have profited from a more rigorous review, not to mention copy-editing (which seemed minimal if at all present—most people on the editorial board are not native English speakers and the publisher is German). Overall, however, the editorial and publishing process was smooth and speedy and the article appeared in print within 7 months of submission—something almost unheard of in humanities journals!