Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
15.7 weeks
15.7 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Rejected
2023
Motivation:
The journal claims a 1st review time of 2.5 weeks, so it came as a great disappointment that the process took four months. In addition, there was only a single reviewer report that was 1 (one) paragraph (and 6 sentences!!). I'm not bothered by the rejection from the journal, as there are many journals with a similar citation score/impact factor, more so that it took months for such lame and poor-quality feedback.
22.7 weeks
22.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2018
Motivation:
Firstly, I would like to underline that the time was very long. Indeed, I remember that the review process by the reviewers took less than one month but the manuscript stayed a very long time before and after with the editor (4 months in total !).
Secondly, if it really was a problem of scope why sending it to reviewers (wasting their time, and mine at the same time), and taking so long to make this decision ?
Finally, one of the review was positive (with few changes that we've done since) but the second one was not really constructive.
Secondly, if it really was a problem of scope why sending it to reviewers (wasting their time, and mine at the same time), and taking so long to make this decision ?
Finally, one of the review was positive (with few changes that we've done since) but the second one was not really constructive.