Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
19.0 weeks
35.9 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2015
Motivation:
We received three reviews, which we addressed in a revision, and the editor said she would send the paper back to one of the original reviewers and no new reviewers, but instead sent it to one original reviewer and two new reviewers. The first round took way too long, but apparently they had issues finding reviewers. I feel the editor should have just accepted the paper after the first round, since the second round didn't contribute much--two of the three reviewers in the second round recommended acceptance, and the other new reviewer made some odd comments based on lack of understanding of the (common) statistical technique we used.