Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
43.4 weeks
43.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
1
1
Accepted
2011
Motivation: The review took over 10 months, and several unreturned emails checking on the status of the review. After this wait, one review was one paragraph long and simply stated the abstract should be "jazzed up". The other review was two paragraphs without much substance. For a top journal, I was disappointed in the length of review, quality of review and lack of communication.
n/a
n/a
121 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2011
Motivation: The review process appeared to be rather unprofessional. The response only came after I asked about the status of the review process. There were no reasons given for the rejection.