Reviews for "Assessment"

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
Assessment 16.4
weeks
33.7
weeks
n/a 1 4
(very good)
0
(very bad)
Rejected
Motivation: Unetical and bad practices: lack of respect for the reviewer who accepted our modified version. Here is his/her only comment:

Reviewer’s Comments to Author:
Reviewer: 1.

1. The authors did well in addressing the reviewer's request for clarification and including a more recent and relevant discussion of the gaps in the literature. Further, the authors adequately addressed questions on statistical analyses and methodology.
Assessment n/a n/a 91.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: This is the reason given for immediate rejection of the manuscript:

"Although it is quite clear that a great deal of effort and thinking went into your study, unfortunately, I find that is (sic) not suitable for publication in Assessment."
Assessment 11.4
weeks
38.3
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Motivation: Many good points made in reviews that improved the manuscript, but the overall process took almost 2 years with 4 rounds of review. At the same time, the journal published other papers fairly quickly that clearly were not held to the same standard. Unevenness in the rigor of review and overly picky requirements by some reviewers/editors seems like a problem.
Assessment n/a n/a 30.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)