Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
7.6 weeks
7.6 weeks
n/a
3 reports
3
3
Rejected
2014
Motivation: The review process was speedy and largely professional. I did not get the impression however that the editor gave due consideration to the issues raised by the reviewers. As all reports specifically noted the interest of the topic and largely raised issues with manuscript structure not the underlying science it seemed a revise and resubmit decision would have been more logical. In short I was left with the impression from the decision and the comments that the editor hadn't really considered the reviews in depth.