Reviews for "Automation in Construction"

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
Automation in Construction 10.4
n/a 5 4
(very good)
Motivation: Most of the reviews were thorough, careful and helpful, but the review process was unnecessarily slow with no responses and indifference from the editor. After the acceptance, it took a while to get the paper published, mostly because the production process introduced inexplicable errors that were not in my submitted version. Overall, the process was average, and I would submit to the journal again hoping that the slow process was just an unfortunate outlier.