Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
n/a
n/a
4 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2021
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2018
22.3 weeks
22.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2018
Motivation:
Beware of this journal. After waiting for a long time to get our manuscript reviewed, the editor decided to reject our manuscript because of the large number of submissions the journal receives and the size of the tasks that the suggested revisions would entail. Both reviewers were fairly positive about our manuscript, but raised a few concerns. Non of the concerns were really fundamental or insurmountable. What happened to major revision? After such a long waiting time to get referee reports, the least we deserve is a decent chance to defend our hard work and revise the paper, no?
16.1 weeks
16.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2017
Motivation:
Both reviews said they liked the paper and the comments were small things to fix. The editor even mention in his rejection that both reviews liked the paper but that because of the large amount of submitting they received they rejected it. I was able to make the changes the reviews suggested in same day and submitted to another journal. It seems the editor should have desk rejected the paper if he felt the topic was not a match for the paper, but honestly I am not sure why the paper was rejected.
Also one of the reviewers clearly did not read the paper as his comments made little to no sense.
Also one of the reviewers clearly did not read the paper as his comments made little to no sense.