Reviews for "Gender and History"

Average duration Review reports
(1st review rnd.)
1st rev. rnd Tot. handling Im. rejection Number Quality Overall rating Outcome Year
n/a 2 4
(very good)
(very bad)
Rejected 2021
Motivation: The communication from the journal was consistently poor. I spent many hours implementing the recommendations from the original review panel, only for my paper to be sent to new reviewers who were not sent an overview of the revisions asked of me. I waited 7 months to receive feedback from the 2 new reviewers, one of whom only provided 3 sentences of feedback. Although the original review process was productive, the second review process was disappointing due to the length of time waited and lack of detail provided.