Reviews for "International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer"
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 | Year |
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer | 8.3 weeks |
9.9 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 5 (excellent) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted | 2019 |
Motivation: Although I think 2 of the reviewers provided moderate comments and one of them believed that the work should be rejected, the other one provided literarily excellent comments and made the paper much better. | ||||||||
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer | 60.1 weeks |
60.1 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 3 (good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted | 2020 |
Motivation: minor comments from the reviewer to add some precision on experimental devices. | ||||||||
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer | 30.6 weeks |
33.0 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 2 (moderate) |
3 (good) |
Accepted | 2019 |
Motivation: Even though IJHMT is highly prestigious journal in heat transfer field, the first review round took so long (approx. 5.5 moths). Also, the quality of the reviews sent us was not so good. The manuscript became more solid after revision, but I guess we expected more qualified comments. After all, the period after editorial decision was very quick and satisfied. If the review period is managed more strictly, the journal will become perfect. | ||||||||
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer | 7.6 weeks |
7.6 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 3 (good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted | 2019 |
Motivation: very positive and constructive comments were addressed by one reviewer. The second reviewer was very concise. | ||||||||
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer | 18.0 weeks |
20.0 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 3 (good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted | 2019 |
Motivation: the reviewers had constructive remarks. However, the manuscript was too long with too many details on the numerical method and its validation. To my point of view, it was not justified to reduce the length of the manuscript since it was a complete work useful for other researchers. | ||||||||
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer | n/a | n/a | 4.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2016 |
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer | 2.7 weeks |
3.0 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 5 (excellent) |
5 (excellent) |
Accepted | 2015 |
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer | n/a | n/a | 0.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2014 |
Motivation: While negative, the answer was very quick. | ||||||||
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer | 6.0 weeks |
8.0 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 5 (excellent) |
5 (excellent) |
Accepted | 2015 |
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer | 71.9 weeks |
71.9 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 4 (very good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted | 2014 |
Motivation: The process of reviewing is long and you should know that before submission due to high volume of papers submitted to this reputable journal | ||||||||
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer | 13.0 weeks |
13.1 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 4 (very good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted | 2014 |
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer | 0.1 weeks |
6.1 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 3 (good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted | 2012 |
Motivation: Online publishing system for sending a little messy. The editor replied quickly. One of the reviewers did not respond for a long time, although his comments related only to the style of the text. |