Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
7.9 weeks
7.9 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Rejected
2019
Motivation:
Only 1 reviewer report was provided along with the rejection letter. The reviewer comments mostly focused on the technical imperfection of the paper instead of the scientific significance/knowledge the paper bears. One of the exact comment from the reviewer sounds "The original idea of the paper is lackluster to be considered for publication in high impact journal like Nano Energy". The editor's decision based solely on a single reviewer's comments is unconvincing.
4.7 weeks
12.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2018
Motivation:
The decision was taken using the only negative, unchanged report of one reviewer (evidently biased) during the review process against two other very positive review reports. The authors do not understand the reason behind it.
8.7 weeks
10.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2015