Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
9.1 weeks
9.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
Motivation:
I am very satisfied with how the journal handled the review process. The handling editor was very active in seeking out reviewers. The comments made by the two reviewers were constructive, and lead to improvements to the submitted software and the corresponding documentation. I should also add that I am a fan of the open peer review model employed by this journal.
n/a
n/a
6 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
Motivation:
Very fast and superficial review process that deemed my article did not "meet our substantial scholarly effort criterion".