Reviews for "European Security"

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
European Security 7.1
weeks
13.7
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: Good editorial guidance
European Security 15.2
weeks
23.9
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Rejected
Motivation: I've made substantial changes to the manuscript after first round of reviews. Reviews were of high quality, although one reviewer was picking up on things that seem to me to be irrelevant to the overall argument. Honestly, I had the feeling that rev. no 2 had not understood what the paper was about, issues that were according to her/him useless were praised by the first reviewer. I've provided both reviewers with "rebuttal letter" pointing out all the changes made according to the reviews. However, rev. no 2 was still not satisfied and keep pointing out new issues, to which I had no chance to reply. Editor eventually decided to side with the rev. no 2 and the manuscript was rejected.
European Security 6.4
weeks
14.4
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
2
(moderate)
Drawn back
Motivation: The first round of revisions really improved the paper. This was enough to satisfy reviewer 1, but insufficient for reviewer 2. The critique of the latter was quite external. Unfortunately the reviewer sided with reviewer 2.