Reviews for "IET Communications"

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
IET Communications 13.6
weeks
13.6
weeks
n/a 3 1
(bad)
1
(bad)
Rejected
Motivation: Although I do not know when the editorial board submitted requests to the reviewers, the reviews were not reflecting 3-month-period of the thorough review.
- The first reviewer wrote 6 lines and complained about the insufficiency of the work.
- The second one wrote 9 lines and advised further references (although there were a limit for the number of references, 20-30, we had enough I believe, 20 references)
- The third reviewer wrote 4 lines and advised 6 more papers to be referenced.

I do not think the review process was serious for such a reputable journal.
I am a grad student and the 3 months of waiting is critical for me as I am trying to finish my thesis and present the jury my accomplishments on the topic.
The editorial board could give me chance to elaborate on the topic with some positive criticism instead of directly "throw-it-to-rubbish" attitude.
Simply I can not accept this review process as an ethical and scientific activity.

IET Communications 13.0
weeks
14.0
weeks
n/a 3 3
(good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Motivation: The reviews were ok