Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
30.4 weeks
67.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2021
Motivation:
The reviewing process was absurdly long, with 7 MONTHS from the submission to the first decision of revision and another 9 MONTHS waiting for the second report after my revision submission, and then the draft was rejected with no reason given by the editor. I do not know what to comment on this extremely long process (during which I could not submit my draft elsewhere and I am a graduate student with only 5 year period of my program!) and how disappointed I was. The editor was very irresponsible and unprofessional. I understand the acceptance rate is low, so I am not angry about the final denial. But they should at least reject it within a reasonable duration. If they could not do their job (I heard that the editor became a dean of her department recently), they should let the author know, so that we can consider submitting our paper to other journals. I don't know if this is normal for this journal or just for the last 2 years (due to transition of publisher), but I feel it does not deserve its reputation now. I rated 1 star for the quality of two of the referee report, otherwise a 17 months rejection with only two rounds of revision should be rated zero.
13.4 weeks
13.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2015
8.7 weeks
13.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2016
Motivation:
Comments from three (reasonable) referees which motivated helpful changes to the paper.
8.7 weeks
11.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2015