Reviews for "Government Information Quarterly"

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
Government Information Quarterly 13.9
n/a 2 4
(very good)
Motivation: The overall process was really fine.
The first review round took longer than we had wished for because the second reviewer did neither accept nor decline the invitation and thus nothing happend for three months. We kindly asked the journal to remind the reviewer again, which then sped up the process a bit.
We could not change the corresponding author. Only the corresponding auhtor can see any information on the process online and will receive the reviews from the editor. That is totally impractical as our corresponding author was not available all the time due to medical issues. This should have been handled better by the editor.
The reviews were well written and fair, we managed to adress all points. The second review round only included one minor request - the editor accepted the manuscript two days later. Overall it was a good process.