Reviews for "Cities"

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
Cities n/a n/a 27.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Cities n/a n/a 18.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Cities 11.0
weeks
11.0
weeks
n/a 0 n/a 0
(very bad)
Rejected
Motivation: After 5 days of being listed as "With Editor" the status changed to "Under Review." 11 weeks later a very curt rejection letter arrived with no reason for rejection or reviewer comments attached. When I asked the editor for comments he said the manuscript was desk rejected so did not require a reason and had no reviewer comments. The manuscript was a replication of an article published in Cities that produced qualitatively different results. I have no faith in the editorial office at Cities. Elsevier said they would contact me regarding the complaint I filed but have heard nothing. Gatekeeping at its finest.
Cities 30.4
weeks
61.9
weeks
n/a 1 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: The review process was a little bit too long. However, communication with the editor was perfect.