Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
9.9 weeks
14.2 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2017
Motivation:
Valuable information given by the reviewers and fair reviewing process.
16.0 weeks
22.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Drawn back
2015
21.9 weeks
21.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2016
Motivation:
Extremely long review process ( 5 months). Associate editor couldn't find reviewers and in the end got only two instead of three. Rejection decision was based on concerns expressed by the two reviewers that were clearly debatable and showed a one-sided theoretical bias. I would have like to have the chance to respond to the reviews. I didn't... I got the sense that the manuscript got the shaft by the associate editor as he/she didn't get involved and wanted this done with. Not impress by the review process.