Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2022
Motivation: Fast and courteous response, somewhat constructive, a positive experience despite the desk rejection.
6.9 weeks
6.9 weeks
n/a
4 reports
4
5
Rejected
2020
Motivation: They have been quick, very polite, clear in explaining the process and the decision. Reports were useful (2 out of 4).
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2013
Motivation: In spite of the extremely quick and, to us, disappointing decision, the editor had carefully reviewed the paper, provided valuable feedback, motivated the decision convincingly, and suggested alternative outlets.
8.7 weeks
8.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
1
2
Rejected
2012
n/a
n/a
4 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2013
Motivation: The reason made it obvious that the editor did not even bother to read the introduction, likely did not even make it through the abstract