Reviews for "Behavioral Ecology"

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
Behavioral Ecology 7.4
weeks
7.4
weeks
n/a 3 3
(good)
4
(very good)
Rejected
Behavioral Ecology n/a n/a 3.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Behavioral Ecology 17.9
weeks
17.9
weeks
n/a 2 2
(moderate)
1
(bad)
Rejected
Motivation: I appreciate every paper is different, and editors are extremely busy, but in this case the editor rejected the ms because they deemd it not significant enough of a contribution to the field. I respect that decsion, althought I would of course argue the point. However, given the editor's opinion, sending it out for revision and the long (for the field) decsion process seems like a waste of everyone's time. It was certainly frustrating. The reviewers comments will be useful in revising the manuscript, but not 4 months useful. This journal also requires specific formatting which contributes to further wasted time. I hope they can modernise a bit to make it a bit less frustrating for potential authors in the future, or at least display publication/ decsion statistics similar to the journal of Animal Behaviour.
Behavioral Ecology 14.9
weeks
14.9
weeks
n/a 2 3
(good)
1
(bad)
Rejected
Motivation: My manuscript was sent to two reviewers. One reviewer failed to respond and the editor didn't find a new reviewer until after I followed up (once the reviewer was over 40 days late). The new review was finished promptly and the editor was apologetic. One reviewer was positive and the second more critical. I received very few reviewer comments, which focused on experimental methods and minor points of clarification. The associate editor seemed more negative than either reviewer and recommended reject. We were disappointed that we didn't get an opportunity to resubmit a revised version.
Behavioral Ecology 11.9
weeks
11.9
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Rejected
Motivation: After my manuscript was sent to two reviewers (one with very positive comments and one more critical), the editor decided to reject the manuscript. Although some points raised by one of the reviewer and the handling editor were fair, I regret that there was no possibility to respond to these comments and resubmit a revised version... Otherwise, the delay of the review process was ok and the handling editor choice of reviewers was relevant (both reviewers signed their review, which is highly appreciable as an author).
Behavioral Ecology 5.3
weeks
5.3
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Rejected
Motivation: Really good reviews that will improve approach if revision for another journal
Behavioral Ecology 4.1
weeks
11.7
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Rejected
Behavioral Ecology n/a n/a 5.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)