Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
13.9 weeks
13.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2023
Motivation:
The handling editor made different suggestions on how to improve the paper and how to complete the data used to better support the interpretation, welcoming a future submission of the revised work. Reasonnable time delay and constructive feedbacks.
20.4 weeks
40.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2017
10.3 weeks
14.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2016
Motivation:
The reviewing and editorial process took three rounds of comments and revision, after this manuscript was submitted and subsequently rejected in 2015, with comments from the same two reviewers who reviewed the new manuscript this year. Especially the process of keeping the editorial decisions in the hands of the Associate Editor, and then have the Executive Editor comment yet another time delayed the process. The process however did ensure a high publication quality, and a very significant involvement of the editors with their journal output, which is the most important.
8.7 weeks
8.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2015
Motivation:
The rejection in combination with very detailed comments from reviewers allowed us to take the time to revise and improve the manuscript significantly, without too much time pressure.