Reviews for "Journal of Behavioral Decision Making"

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
Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 6.9
weeks
22.7
weeks
n/a 4 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: 4 reviews were unusual. But the editor gave a fair decision, I thought.
Journal of Behavioral Decision Making n/a n/a 0.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 30.4
weeks
30.4
weeks
n/a 2 1
(bad)
1
(bad)
Rejected
Motivation: The editor apparently "lost sight" of the manuscript. We asked about its status after 5 months, at which point he told us he had given up on finding a second reviewer but would be making a last effort towards this aim. Two months later, we received referee reports advising rejection. The first report focus on the organization of the paper sums up to saying "this is not the way we do it in behavioral sciences" and the second sums up to saying "I do not understand what is a mixed logit model". Both reviewers were dogmatic in their rejection, one saying that the question we dealt with was not the traditional way to look at the specific phenomenon we investigated, the other suggesting he did not trust our "sophisticated econometrics".
Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 5.7
weeks
5.7
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Rejected
Motivation: Review process was very fast. Critical points of the referees were understood and summarized, decision was in line with reports.
Referees clearly put some work into their reviews and added substantial value to the manuscript for resubmission at another journal.