Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
18.3 weeks
23.3 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Accepted
2017
36.7 weeks
42.9 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2013
Motivation:
It took 8 months and a couple of inquiring emails to finally hear back from the journal after submission and receive reviewers' comments. Nevertheless, reviewer reports were detailed, pertinent, considerate and extremely useful to improve the paper. Handling editor was friendly, but handling process was inefficient. Communication was poor, and I only got the final decision letter after editor realised that the journal had already sent me the proofs to revise...
Drawn back before first editorial decision after 82.0 days
Drawn back
2016
Motivation:
First submission was a desk reject because editor claimed it did not meet the subjects published in the journal. After pointing out editor's mistake (the terms and scope clearly favored the subject I was writing about) I was allowed to resubmit. Paper then sat in queue without being touched for nearly three months. Attempted to contact editor three times - no response. Withdrawn,
12.7 weeks
14.7 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Accepted
2016
n/a
n/a
12 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2016
Motivation:
The editor thought it was not a good fit for the journal, without much explanation.
n/a
n/a
14 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2016
Motivation:
My paper was desk-rejected by the editor for being a poor fit, without any meaningful feedback or explanation as to why that was the case. At least they didn't take long.