Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
10.3 weeks
10.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2018
30.1 weeks
30.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2013
Motivation:
Too long
47.7 weeks
47.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2012
Motivation:
Extremely lengthy delays; received detailed reviewer comments that I was required to address even after I had been notified that the manuscript had been accepted for publication
20.4 weeks
20.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Rejected
2013
Motivation:
The journal was extremely slow to assign peer reviewers, admitting after three months (and several enquiries from us) that they had not yet sent the manuscript out for review. Peer review comments were ultimately received from three peer reviewers, among whom there was considerable disagreement. The reviewers who criticised the manuscript were fair in their criticism and we felt that their feedback would have been relatively easy to integrate into the manuscript. However, after nearly five months, the editor recommended outright rejection, pushing our publication timelines back significantly (p<0.05).