Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
3.9 weeks
6.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2022
Motivation:
Reviewers pointed out the background of the research and theoretical issues. There were also many comments on statistical analysis. Revisions were difficult because of disagreements between myself and the reviewers on some methodologies. It was difficult because this journal has a short period of time between the receipt of a decision and the revision of the paper.
5.4 weeks
5.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2022
Motivation:
After the first round of review, we requested more time to make modifications than the 10 days proposed. The editor was quick in replying and accepting our request.
3.0 weeks
3.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2021
2.6 weeks
2.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2022
2.9 weeks
2.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2022
4.9 weeks
5.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2022
Motivation:
The journal provides a swift and clear pathway to process the manuscript submission. It was a good experience to submit my work to this journal with constructive feedback.
8.0 weeks
8.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2022
3.3 weeks
4.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2021
2.9 weeks
3.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2021
2.9 weeks
4.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2020
2.1 weeks
3.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2020
Motivation:
Thanks the contribution by reviewers and editoral team. I had a positive and pleasure contact and submission.
3.3 weeks
4.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2020
Motivation:
This journal have a rapid peer-review process and friendly submission system. The reviewers proivded pertinent comments to help the authors shape the manuscript in a strong and readable manner. In addition, the communication with the assigned assistant editor was pretty smooth, and she responsed swiftly and fully answered the questions we raised. This is the first time that we submit our research to this journal, and we suggest those who prefer a short period of peer-review process to submit their studies to this journal.
0.6 weeks
0.6 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2020
4.9 weeks
6.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2020
Motivation:
The technical side of the review process was excellent - clear communication & fast responses. Deadlines for resubmitting the manuscript were very short (one week, if I remember correctly).
The quality of the reviews was very disappointing. The first reviewer wrote just a few sentences, full of typos and almost exclusively related to two specific aspects of the paper (nevertheless those comments were helpful). The second reviewer just questioned the whole paper without suggesting any changes. No comments regarded the method section or the main theme. Reviewers did not seem to be familiar with the methods used.
The quality of the reviews was very disappointing. The first reviewer wrote just a few sentences, full of typos and almost exclusively related to two specific aspects of the paper (nevertheless those comments were helpful). The second reviewer just questioned the whole paper without suggesting any changes. No comments regarded the method section or the main theme. Reviewers did not seem to be familiar with the methods used.
0.7 weeks
1.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2019
Motivation:
Opinions of the reviewers are useful and helpful to our manuscript. This journal is very efficient!
2.0 weeks
3.0 weeks
n/a
4 reports
Accepted
2015