Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
11.0 weeks
13.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2017
Motivation:
A great journal, with a precise and almost rapid review process.
3.0 weeks
3.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2016
Motivation:
Nothing more to say. All was very smooth and reasonable
8.1 weeks
8.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2016
Motivation:
-the revision duration was correct
-the reviewers arguments to reject the paper were acceptable
-the reviewers arguments to reject the paper were acceptable
5.3 weeks
5.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2012
Motivation:
This was my first experience with double-blinded process. I have to say that it was a really positive experience for the obvious reason; I noticed that there was not bias at all in the process regarding our experience in the field. They evaluate only the submitted work.