Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
n/a
n/a
26 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2026
Motivation:
Rejected after 26 days. To be honest, when I saw on scirev that a senior had written about being rejected at the table for 25 days but had survived for 25 days and even celebrated a little, I never expected the retribution to come so soon (laugh). The advantage of the internal audit is that they did review the papers and put forward two relatively precise opinions. The drawback is that the efficiency is indeed not commendable. Four days after submission, "with editor+UR". Twenty days after submission, "with editor" disappears, leaving only "UR". Personally, I guess only the UR after we disappeared was truly under review by the editorial department. But from this perspective, the efficiency was quite low. Basically, there was no progress for about twenty full days.
n/a
n/a
2 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2024
Motivation:
Quick desk reject.
11.1 weeks
11.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2024
9.7 weeks
9.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2023
8.3 weeks
8.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2022
n/a
n/a
25 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2022
Motivation:
Getting a desk reject is okay, and somewhat careless handling and explanation is expected at this stage. But it just took quite a bit longer than most other desk rejects I've received. The submission tracker was also shown as 'under review', which is very misleading.
n/a
n/a
4 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2016
Motivation:
The review process was very fast. From the comments provided by the editorial board, I got the impression that the manuscript was read thoroughly. A clear reason for rejection was provided. The editorial board also suggested alternatives for publication.
n/a
n/a
14 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2013