Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
5.7 weeks
9.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2014
Motivation:
Content and editorial reviews were excellent in improving content and language. Adequate reminders were sent regarding re-submission deadline.
10.4 weeks
12.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2013
4.3 weeks
6.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2013
n/a
n/a
13 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2014
Motivation:
Although the final submission was May 19, I actually submitted it on May 5, after which the editors asked me to provide additional information which created further delays. In my opinion, if they were going to reject the paper they could have done so without asking for the additional information and causing this delay.
4.3 weeks
4.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2013
Motivation:
One review was 1 sentence long, asking why anyone would be interested in the topic. The other review addressed unclear abbreviations in tables and made small suggestions for the figures; only substantive question was central to the paper.