Reviews for "Geoforum"

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
Geoforum 11.7
weeks
35.6
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: The quality of the reviews was excellent and the editor was very responsive and timely. The reviewers really helped in making the paper better. The one drawback is that one of the reviewers took a long time to respond, which delayed the process.
Geoforum 8.4
weeks
15.6
weeks
n/a 4 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted
Motivation: I believe it was a relatively quick process, and the comments of the reviewers made sense.
Geoforum 8.7
weeks
21.7
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
1
(bad)
Rejected
Motivation: We are very disappointed about our submission to this journal. Instead of sending our revised version to reviewers again, the editor decided to reject our manuscript after three months of waiting, without any descent comments why so. He/she referred to 'substantial issues' but refused to specify these.