Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
3.7 weeks
3.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Rejected
2021
9.1 weeks
23.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2021
Motivation:
The review of the revised manuscript was very long because one of the reviewers in the first round "disappeared." The editor had to find another peer which proved to be very problematic during the COVID period. Despite all these problems, the editor was very helpful and answered the questions quickly.
4.1 weeks
8.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2019
7.9 weeks
10.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2018
Motivation:
The review process is different from usual review procedures.
The editor informs the authors about the reviews that can be consulted on an interactive review forum. This way, each answer can be posted independently, not as a block, allowing to discuss specific points with the reviewers until the revised manuscript is endorsed by both of them. In this interactive forum, the editor can also be directly contacted.
The editor informs the authors about the reviews that can be consulted on an interactive review forum. This way, each answer can be posted independently, not as a block, allowing to discuss specific points with the reviewers until the revised manuscript is endorsed by both of them. In this interactive forum, the editor can also be directly contacted.