Reviews for "Methods in Ecology and Evolution"

Average duration Review reports
(1st review rnd.)
1st rev. rnd Tot. handling Im. rejection Number Quality Overall rating Outcome Year
n/a n/a 1.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2020
Motivation: I felt the article was rejected really quickly (less than 1day), and based on the critics made by the Editor, it seemed that the article was not properly read.
n/a n/a 18.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2020
5.1
weeks
10.4
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
5
(excellent)
Accepted 2018
Motivation: Very fast handling overall, despite two thorough rounds of reviews (which helped to improve the manuscript considerably). Always a pleasant communication with different members of the editorial office.
n/a n/a 60.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2019
Motivation: Sixty days for an abstract-based rejection
6.6
weeks
6.6
weeks
n/a 4 3
(good)
5
(excellent)
Rejected 2018
Motivation: The manuscript was processed very quickly and efficiently. The editor gave a detailed reply justifying why he rejected the paper and did encourage us to resubmit the paper if we decided to expand it into a larger research paper.
n/a n/a 22.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2017
Motivation: Pretty slow to reject without review.
n/a n/a 53.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2018
Motivation: The decision of lack of fit (a single phrase) took so long (7.6 weeks).
4.4
weeks
4.4
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Rejected 2016