Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
Drawn back before first editorial decision after 210.0 days
Drawn back
2023
Motivation: Submitted manuscript on 26th April 2023. Heard that the manuscript was under review in June 2023 after emailing the team. Only one review was completed till 26th Nov 2023 and emails weren't answered at all. No timelines were provided to complete the review. Manuscript was withdrawn in November.
n/a
n/a
5 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2023
Motivation: In any case, the rejection was quick and didn't take too long. I would have appreciated a brief rejection note.
8.7 weeks
8.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
2
1
Rejected
2023
n/a
n/a
30 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2021
Motivation: initial editorial decision (desk rejection) took quite long
14.6 weeks
15.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
3
Accepted
2023
Motivation: first editorial processing and decision to send to reviewers took quite long
n/a
n/a
6 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2022
Motivation: The recommendation letter provided to us offered very little insight on how exactly the manuscript was inappropriate for this particular journal, considering similar studies have been published in it before. Thus, we were left more confused than edified by the experience. Additionally, the editor recommended publication in a journal that they manage; a journal that ranks quite poorly and not to the level of JAD. We were a tad offended by this and didn’t appreciate it.

However, we did appreciate that the journal took only a week to reject such that we would move onto another.
n/a
n/a
112 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2022
Motivation: I will suggest avoid submitting your manuscript to this journal, especially those time sensitive ones. The editor just "have the right" to ignore your submissions and issues desk rejections after 4 months. In my case, I sent inquiry emails to them around 8 weeks and received automated replies. However, 8 more weeks waiting gave me an "immediate" rejection with a one-sentence email saying "not a good fit". Well, I guess those editors must be super busy and I will try not to disturb in the future.
19.6 weeks
19.6 weeks
n/a
1 reports
0
0
Rejected
2021
Motivation: My paper was rejected based on a single review report. The reviewer devoted just a few lines to express his/her evaluation, pointing out some issues which could be easily tackled. I am very disappointed about the way in which the manuscript was handled by the associated editor. In the rejection letter he wrote, after more than 4 months from the initial submission, that the manuscript does not fit with the aims of the journal. Before to write this review, I wrote a complain letter to the editor, expressing all my disappointment in receiving just a single (superficial) report review limited to a few lines and in being informed afyer more than 4 months that my manuscript was not appropriate for the aims of the journal. Why didn't he informed me earlier with an immediate rejection? His answer was very generic and he did not reply properly, explianing his choices (e.g., "we receive many papers more competing than yours". Ok, no problems about this, but still, why didn't he reject immediately the manuscript?). I never will submit another manuscript to this journal, there are more professional outlets and it is not my intention to waste further time with unprofessional editors like that.
9.4 weeks
9.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
3
3
Rejected
2019
Motivation: While the end result was a rejection, the review process itself yielded three helpful reviews and did not take too long.
11.0 weeks
18.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
3
3
Accepted
2020
12.4 weeks
12.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
2
Rejected
2018
Motivation: We received 3 reviews(after 12 weeks from submission) - two were clearly positive, even enthusiastic, one was mixed, but mostly negative. The editor decided rejection, even though the critiques from the mostly negative review were relatively easy to address(where they were appropriate) or to refute (where they contained factual errors)
13.0 weeks
13.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
5
1
Rejected
2019
Motivation: Rejection was not explained though the review was a positive one. Only one review in a long period.
20.1 weeks
29.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
1
Rejected
2019
Motivation: The first round of reviews took 20 weeks, which is too long to go without some sort of explanation. We were then asked for two separate revisions to address the same issue. We addressed it to the very best of our ability in the first rebuttal-- there was no need for a second R&R to be issued, after which the paper was still rejected. It's unfortunate that the editor tied up the paper for over 9 months. I do not think the second revision yielded any sort of substantive progress or constructive feedback.
8.0 weeks
15.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
5
Accepted
2018
Motivation: For my field, this was an extremely fast turnaround from first submission, to revision, to acceptance. I was also satisfied with the quality of the peer reviews I received.
4.0 weeks
4.0 weeks
n/a
4 reports
1
2
Rejected
2017
10.6 weeks
20.3 weeks
n/a
1 reports
4
4
Accepted
2017
n/a
n/a
3 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2014
6.0 weeks
7.4 weeks
n/a
0 reports
n/a
4
Accepted
2014