Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
3.3 weeks
4.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2023
5.6 weeks
5.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2016
Motivation:
Expeditious, no-nonsense review process.
4.4 weeks
4.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2015
Motivation:
Quick and reasonable reviews.
10.1 weeks
17.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2019
Motivation:
The review process was of high quality and fair, but took a lot of time. It seemed they had difficulties finding reviewers. Even though the reviewers voted for "major revision", the resubmitted manuscript was treated as a new submission. Thus, the dates of submission and acceptance which are shown on the paper are actually only representing the time after the first round of reviews and are not reflecting the whole process.
6.0 weeks
6.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2017
Motivation:
The review was slow because they had problems finding reviewers, but after acceptance it was published online within two weeks. The layout and copy editing was excellent, making the paper look beautiful. They were very responsive and helpful to any questions I have. I also greatly appreciate that they track the number of people who read and download the paper.
5.4 weeks
7.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2017
Motivation:
Overall, very happy with quality of reviews and review process. However, the journal's office policy/submission system can be improved. Currently, G3 has two options for revise and resubmit. The first allows 30 days to revise and does not require entering metadata for the article again. The second allows 90 days to revise but requires the author to manually re-enter all of the metadata required for a new submission.
8.6 weeks
8.6 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Accepted
2015
4.6 weeks
5.3 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Accepted
2015
Motivation:
Overall, the G3 review process was fast and fair. Our manuscript was properly evaluated on the work submitted both both the reviewers and editor.