Reviews for "Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin"

Average duration Review reports
(1st review rnd.)
1st rev. rnd Tot. handling Im. rejection Number Quality Overall rating Outcome Year
17.3
weeks
38.0
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Rejected 2018
13.0
weeks
13.0
weeks
n/a 2 3
(good)
2
(moderate)
Rejected 2018
Motivation: Reviewers were competent and provided useful feedback. Time handling of the manuscript was definitely reasonable. Still, the manuscript was rejected based only on some critiques by one of the two reviewers which could have been answered. The other reviewer suggested acceptance with very minor revisions. Also, the editor was clearly not a specialist in the domain, despite the fact that the editorial board of the journal includes prominent scholars in the specific field of the article.
n/a n/a 4.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2016
Motivation: The article was rejected because "it mainly contained replications of previous work", which of course is a very archaic reason for rejection in the year 2016. Other than that, the desk rejection was quickly handled.

I have no reason to discourage submissions of exclusively original works to PSPB, but apparantly works containing replications (note that our manuscript also contained novel contributions to the literature) are not welcome there and I would strongly suggest to submit them elsewhere.
10.3
weeks
10.3
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Rejected 2014
Motivation: Although both reviewers were quite enthusiastic about this manuscript, one of them stated that the presented effects were rather small. The editor based his rejection solely on this fact.

The reviews themselves were quite elaborate and very helpful to improve the manuscript and they were completed rather quickly.
6.7
weeks
6.7
weeks
n/a 2 2
(moderate)
3
(good)
Rejected 2016
Motivation: Reviews deeply split. Editor acted quickly