Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
n/a
n/a
6 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2025
Motivation:
There is a serious ethical concern in the screening review process, particularly the apparent reliance on ChatGPT by the reviewer. According to the review report, 80% of the listed references are not found. Among them, the reviewer recommended a JIT article that cannot be found on the journal’s official website.
17.1 weeks
17.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Rejected
2023
Motivation:
This was a fairly standard special-issue handling. The review reports were received a month late relative to the original schedule, but that is not excessive. The reviewers gave reasons for their rejections. Not what we wanted, but it is hard to make sense of "not sufficiently original". I accept that that is the subjective aspect of peer review.