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.)
2014
Motivation:
The summary of reasons for rejection was most helpful, illuminating both the strengths of the piece, the reason for rejection (the topic was too specific for the journal) and suggested revisions prior to submission elsewhere. This is valuable and appreciated.
13.0 weeks
19.5 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2010
Motivation:
Very professional handling of the review process. The review process was fast and transparent, and the reviews had a high quality. Even though I did not agree with all parts of the reasoning, I could well understand the decision of the editors.