Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2021
Motivation:
The paper was desk-rejected very quickly (within one day). The editor stated that there is no contribution and that it is out of scope (not true as related papers are published all the time in the journal). Afterward, the paper was easily accepted in another top journal, so its quality and contribution were not an issue. Gatekeeping at its finest.
Immediately accepted after 0.1 weeks
Accepted (im.)
2018
6.3 weeks
6.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Rejected
2018
Motivation:
This journal is professional and the paper status is up-to-date which make the authors less worry. But the reviewers comments some of them very good and many of them are not helpful. For example, a review was mentiond my paper has mistakes and grammatical errors (he/she is correct) however his/her comments have errors too.
5.9 weeks
15.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2016
Motivation:
High quality review reports but the review cycle is long.
22.4 weeks
30.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2016
Motivation:
The reviews were useful and quite to the point. The communication with the Editor was perfect, but it took some time to receive the reviews and the decision.