Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
72.1 weeks
72.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2024
Motivation:
It was absolutely shameful how long this entire ordeal took. Even repeated emails to the editorial staff did not seem to expedite the process. The outcome was reviewer comments that did not move beyond general editor-type observations.
Drawn back before first editorial decision after 304.0 days
Drawn back
2023
Motivation:
Four months after submission, our manuscript was still with the editor. I wrote several times to the editors in chief and the publisher agent to ask what was happening. After four months, the paper was at last sent to reviewers, I am not sure how many. Four months later, the tracking system was informing me that the one reviewer had sent his/her comments. No other reviewers were in the process (it indicated that one other reviewer did not accept to review). Again, I sent several emails to inquire. I was told first that a decision will be taken with this one reviewer. Nothing happened. I inquired again. I was told to be patient. After four months, the tracking system was indicating no sign of activity. I had no responses or reactions from the editors in chief. After 10 months, we decided to withdraw our paper. The Publisher agents were very responsive (I probably had emails with 6 of them), but basically could only tell me to be patient. The editors in chief never ever reacted. Very disappointing. I can understand the challenge of finding reviewers, but a minimum communication would have been appreciated. I even started to doubt if the editors in chief really existed... which is probably just my frustration (but who knows).
22.6 weeks
22.6 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Rejected
2024
Motivation:
The manuscript remained 'with the editor' until January, when we wrote to find out what had happened. The editor then sent it to the reviewers. One of them revised the manuscript in half an hour without giving any reason for the rejection. The journal has no respect for the work of researchers. After 6 months, we expected at least some justifications that could improve our work.
61.7 weeks
61.7 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Rejected
2021
Motivation:
The journal did not provide any valuable comments, it just wrote that it was not suitable. Several editors have changed, they have sent apologies that they have lost / forgotten, and so on. A good journal if you're in no rush.
n/a
n/a
59 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2020
17.4 weeks
17.4 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Rejected
2019
Motivation:
In my opinion, a better better approach would be to reject the paper straight away than spend several months revieweing it (one reviewer was assigned), with the outcome of the review process being one short paragraph. At least, not for a journal that seeks to achieve prominence in the field.
10.7 weeks
24.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2017
26.1 weeks
29.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2016
12.9 weeks
21.6 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2015
11.7 weeks
26.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2013