Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
22.7 weeks
22.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Rejected
2016
Motivation:
Decent duration of the review process. Two out three reviews of good quality, which certainly improved the manuscript, although the paper was rejected.
23.0 weeks
38.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Rejected
2014
Motivation:
The review process took very long - almost a year passed between submission and rejection. The critics which lead to rejection were merely mentioned in the first review round, and the efforts put into revising the paper seemed not be taken into account for the final decision. Therefore, the review process and outcome were quite frustrating. The paper was accepted in a journal with similar quality with minor revisions afterwards.