Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
65.1 weeks
65.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2018
Motivation:
The reviews consisted each of two lines without going into the argument we were trying to make or its substantiation or merits. The only feedback I got from the editor was that the manuscript was 'not suitable. '
Another problem was that they did not respond to emails I sent after I did not hear from them. Only after about 15 months did they respond, and that was with this minimal rejection.
Another problem was that they did not respond to emails I sent after I did not hear from them. Only after about 15 months did they respond, and that was with this minimal rejection.
25.0 weeks
90.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2016
Motivation:
All in all, I can't recommend it. The reviews were ok, but the editorial office was extremely unresponsive. After a request for some minor revisions that we carried out in less than 3 weeks, we were left without any information regarding our manuscript for almost a year. Meanwhile we sent plenty of emails, with no answer. However it resulted in an 'accept', it was a very disappointing experience.