Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
11.6 weeks
11.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2020
Motivation:
Of the two reviews, one would be solid and useful and the suggestion was to make major changes. Another reviewer rejected the paper and did not give a single comment, only writing "unsatisfactory". Such a review can be done by anyone, which I believe significantly reduces the reputation of the journal. Waiting time for reviews was within acceptable.
9.1 weeks
9.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2016
Motivation:
Fast and straightforward process. The reviewers had many insightful suggestions that really improved the paper.