Follow @scirev on Twitter
Reviews for "Journal of Phycology"
| Journal title | Average duration | Review reports (1st review rnd.) |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (click to go to journal page) | 1st rev. rnd | Tot. handling | Im. rejection | Number | Quality | Overall rating | Outcome |
| Journal of Phycology | 30.4 weeks |
33.9 weeks |
n/a | 1 | 4 (very good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted |
| Journal of Phycology | 20.1 weeks |
20.1 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 3 (good) |
4 (very good) |
Drawn back |
| Journal of Phycology | 5.0 weeks |
5.7 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 5 (excellent) |
5 (excellent) |
Accepted |
| Journal of Phycology | 13.0 weeks |
21.7 weeks |
n/a | 1 | 4 (very good) |
3 (good) |
Accepted |
| Journal of Phycology | 8.7 weeks |
15.2 weeks |
n/a | 1 | 4 (very good) |
3 (good) |
Accepted |
| Journal of Phycology | 17.4 weeks |
23.9 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 4 (very good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted |
| Motivation: The reviewers were expert referees. They had many good and constructive comments. Even though the reviewers had certain substantive concerns in the first submission, they clearly saw the potential and were responsive to our significant efforts in revision. The editor was fair and prompt in responses. | |||||||