Reviews for "Quaternary Geochronology"

Journal title Average duration Review reports
(1st review rnd.)
(click to go to journal page) 1st rev. rnd Tot. handling Im. rejection Number Quality Overall rating Outcome
Quaternary Geochronology 7.7
n/a 3 4
(very good)
(very good)
Motivation: The review process was not extra long despite the hard times of COVID pandemic.
The collected reviews were professional. One reviewer was supportive, however the others criticized that the topic is out of the scope of the journal. It was a bit strange that the strictest reviewer meticuously criticized some very-very minor points (like usage of synonims, or the color of a line in a figure) of the manuscript.
Anyway, we agreed that a part of the discussion is a bit out of the scope of the journal, so we considered some comments of the reviewers and submit the revised version to a different journal.