Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
8.1 weeks
8.4 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Accepted
2023
Motivation:
The review process was time-effective and fair. I also really appreciate the editor's wisdom, not sending out the revised version for additional review but making the decision by herself immediately (which practice is less and less common these days when editors simply act like corresponding clerks between authors and reviewers but not making real decisions). My only concern is that we have received a single peer review report, which I believe is below the industry-standard.
11.1 weeks
13.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2016
26.0 weeks
56.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2015
20.0 weeks
20.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Rejected
2015
Motivation:
Providing a single reviewer opinion in 4.5 months seems to me highly inefficient. Otherwise the content of the review was fair.