Reviews for "Knowledge-Based Systems"
Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
n/a
n/a
30 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2019
Motivation:
Even though they rejected my article, the editor pointed out very important problem in my article that improved the quality of the article by checking and fixing them.
The reviewing time was about a month, which was very appropriate.
The reviewing time was about a month, which was very appropriate.
12.1 weeks
19.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2020
Motivation:
The only imperfection was in the first review round, in which one of the reviewers sent a review about a different paper from ours. The editor was quick in contacting the reviewer and asking for the correct review.
n/a
n/a
70 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2021
Motivation:
Worst journal and editorial team. They rejected my manuscript after two month because they found similarity with another paper: the preprint version of the same manuscript at arxiv!!! They didn't realize this even though it was allowed in Guide For Authors.
19.0 weeks
19.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2020
Motivation:
I contacted the associate editor 5 times and the editor-in-chief twice, during the review process, but I didn't get a response. The peer-review process and quality were poor and irresponsible.
5.1 weeks
47.3 weeks
n/a
4 reports
Rejected
2020
Motivation:
The editor-in-chief adds reviewers until she believes she can justify the rejection that she has already decided on beforehand. The decision to reject was made even though almost all reviewers accepted the changes. I contacted the editor-in-chief twice, once during the review process and once after, but I didn't get a response on either occasion.
17.1 weeks
17.1 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Rejected
2016
Motivation:
Very poor peer review process indeed.
n/a
n/a
27 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2019