Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
9.1 weeks
14.7 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Accepted
2016
Motivation:
Editor was balanced and reasonable. Review report was good. Second round was quite fast. The single less satisfactory aspect was that only one reviewer was consulted.
5.0 weeks
6.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2012
Motivation:
In their comments, the reviewers demonstrated that they know the topic and latest tendencies in the research very well. All the comments were well-formulated, up-to-the-point and constructive.