Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
1.3 weeks
3.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2022
Motivation:
The review process was quite fast, and comments reviewers were valued in the improved manuscript
22.4 weeks
22.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2019
Motivation:
The review period was too long (almost 6 months) and the editor decided to reject the paper, even having only minor revisions from the two reviewers.
18.9 weeks
50.7 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Accepted
2017
Motivation:
The waiting time for a first response was very long (from August, 2016 until January, 2017) over the expected/average 54 days showed on the journals page (http://www.springer.com/environment/monitoring+-+environmental+analysis/journal/10661). After resubmitting the paper, the final response also took a long time (February, 2017 until September, 2017), considering that just minor chances were made to the paper.
After acceptance, the publishing process was fast and well handled.
After acceptance, the publishing process was fast and well handled.
15.6 weeks
16.3 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Accepted
2016
34.7 weeks
52.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2014
Motivation:
It took several emails to the editor to get the original reviews. Eight months is way too long to wait for reviews.
13.0 weeks
13.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2013
Motivation:
review process takes too much time