Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
71.6 weeks
71.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2026
Motivation:
It took a year and a half to receive the review report after submission, and they rejected the paper without allowing the author any explanation. It's a waste of time and shows no respect for scholarship. I sincerely advise against submitting to this journal.
71.7 weeks
71.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2026
Motivation:
The challenges faced by early-career scholars are particularly acute in the humanities, where lengthy review processes and limited publication opportunities can significantly affect academic development.
I just received a first decision on a manuscript after 18 months of waiting—just a heads-up for anyone thinking of submitting to Cold War History (Taylor & Francis). Despite making several inquiries about the status of my submission, I was repeatedly told that the journal had been unable to secure suitable reviewers, leading to prolonged delays in the review process.
I get that peer review takes time, but 18 months for a decision is just unacceptable. It makes it impossible to plan your research or career, especially if you're on a tight timeline. After a year and a half of silence, it was a straight-up rejection with zero opportunity to submit revisions or address the feedback.
It makes it impossible to plan your research or career, especially if you're on a tight timeline. I hope that future authors will not encounter the same difficulties and prolonged uncertainty that I experienced during this process, where lengthy review processes and limited publication opportunities can significantly affect academic development.
I just received a first decision on a manuscript after 18 months of waiting—just a heads-up for anyone thinking of submitting to Cold War History (Taylor & Francis). Despite making several inquiries about the status of my submission, I was repeatedly told that the journal had been unable to secure suitable reviewers, leading to prolonged delays in the review process.
I get that peer review takes time, but 18 months for a decision is just unacceptable. It makes it impossible to plan your research or career, especially if you're on a tight timeline. After a year and a half of silence, it was a straight-up rejection with zero opportunity to submit revisions or address the feedback.
It makes it impossible to plan your research or career, especially if you're on a tight timeline. I hope that future authors will not encounter the same difficulties and prolonged uncertainty that I experienced during this process, where lengthy review processes and limited publication opportunities can significantly affect academic development.