Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
8.1 weeks
12.9 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
4
Accepted
2021
Motivation: The reviews were detailed and of high quality and helped improve the manuscript.
Communicating with the journal was easy and the process was clear.
6.4 weeks
10.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
2018
13.9 weeks
13.9 weeks
n/a
1 reports
0
1
Rejected
2019
Motivation: Our experience of submission to Journal of Cell Science was extremely poor. It took over 3 months to receive an editorial rejection (including two emails to chase up the manuscript in this time, though responses to this were quick in all fairness).

While rejection is part of the process we were very taken aback by the poor quality of the reviews. 2 reports were submitted, one of which did not constitute any feedback, constructive or otherwise - simply stating that the work was not relevant or suited to publication in Journal of Cell Science. Ultimately the review process was extremely protracted and not even remotely constructive - huge waste of time. Even if reviewers think poorly of the manuscript, we should be given scientific reasons/criticism to work on (even if rejected!). It should not have taken 3 months to receive a rejection like this.
4.0 weeks
8.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
2015
Motivation: We appreciated the fact that the editor commit himself in the revision process. We had to make some changes after the acceptance and the editorial office responded very kindly to our demands.
7.1 weeks
13.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
2014