Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
13.1 weeks
13.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Rejected
2024
Motivation:
Two of the reviews were not competent, and the reviewers did not know the literature nor understand what a research note was, or seem to have much understanding of survey research. The third supported publication.
The pool of competent academics and reviewers in Australia in public administration may be shallow so the editors may have been stuck with the poor reviewers, but the editors should have probably discounted the two reviewers. The editorial team is a new one. Mid range journals perhaps need articles that will be cited, if only to increase their impact factors, and perhaps move outside their provincial focus, particularly in regional environments.
The pool of competent academics and reviewers in Australia in public administration may be shallow so the editors may have been stuck with the poor reviewers, but the editors should have probably discounted the two reviewers. The editorial team is a new one. Mid range journals perhaps need articles that will be cited, if only to increase their impact factors, and perhaps move outside their provincial focus, particularly in regional environments.
4.0 weeks
6.5 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2020
Motivation:
This journal can turn around articles v. quickly. The editor is engaged in the process. I have published a few articles in this and have always been impressed by its commitment to doing a good job. Reviewers are mostly (not always) constructive and helpful. Articles I have published here have a solid citation outcome, often better than ones I have published in ostensibly better ranked UK or US journals.
n/a
n/a
41 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2017
Motivation:
It is a long period of time for the editors to give you the first outcome that the manuscript is out of scope. However, admin is a very responsive.
19.4 weeks
24.1 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Accepted
2013
Motivation:
The submission was a short commentary paper. I believe the review process should have been shorter considering this.