Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
4.0 weeks
5.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2020
Motivation:
My experience with this journal was really the worst. Non-ethical with the authors.
1.4 weeks
2.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2015
Motivation:
The journal provided two superficial reviews below any standard. The first one was only a paragraph long. However, it contained one pertinent comment which wouldn't be possible to notice without carefully reading the manuscript, so my guess is that the reviewer did actually read the paper but didn't bother to comment. The second review was a non-review: it didn't contain a single word (empty text). Not a serious journal.
4.7 weeks
5.6 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2015
Motivation:
Fast processing time, but rather poor quality reviews. We only received superficial comments that only marginally improved the contents of the paper.