Reviews for "ISA Transactions"
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 |
ISA Transactions | 95.5 weeks |
95.5 weeks |
n/a | 4 | 1 (bad) |
0 (very bad) |
Rejected |
Motivation: This was the worst submission I have ever had. This is unbearable for a PhD student to waste 22 month for such an irregular journal. ِDuring this time, the editor was saying that he needs 1 additional review to make the decision. | |||||||
ISA Transactions | 14.1 weeks |
21.1 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 4 (very good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted |
Motivation: The reviewers were very objective in their reviews (major revision) and highlighted the critical issues with the paper. After resubmission, the paper was accepted without any further hurdle. The reviewers were less critical as I had uploaded videos of experimental results. | |||||||
ISA Transactions | 5.9 weeks |
49.1 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 5 (excellent) |
5 (excellent) |
Accepted |
ISA Transactions | 10.0 weeks |
10.0 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 2 (moderate) |
2 (moderate) |
Rejected |
ISA Transactions | 9.9 weeks |
9.9 weeks |
n/a | 4 | 0 (very bad) |
2 (moderate) |
Rejected |
ISA Transactions | 15.4 weeks |
15.4 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 0 (very bad) |
0 (very bad) |
Rejected |
Motivation: The paper has been submitted to reviewers and I received only comments from one reviewer and the comments of the editor. The editor decide to reject the paper for the following reason: 'This is not one of the application focuses of ISA Trans. There are number of journals in this area, as listed in References in the paper. The authors may consider to submit the paper to one of these journals'. -Why they take more than three months to tell me that the paper is outside of the scope of the journal. |