Reviews for "Technovation"

Average duration			Review reports (1^st review rnd.)
1^st rev. rnd	Tot. handling	Im. rejection	Number	Quality	Overall rating	Outcome	Year
26.0 weeks	69.4 weeks	n/a	2	1 (bad)	1 (bad)	Accepted	2016
Motivation: Very low quality of reviews. Reviewers changed multiple times during the process. No clarification of reviews by editor. Communication took long and it was difficult to get any replies.
n/a	n/a	4.0 days	n/a	n/a	n/a	Rejected (im.)	2016
8.7 weeks	8.8 weeks	n/a	2	4 (very good)	5 (excellent)	Accepted	2013
34.7 weeks	69.4 weeks	n/a	2	4 (very good)	1 (bad)	Accepted	2012
Motivation: It took forever.
26.0 weeks	26.0 weeks	n/a	1	0 (very bad)	0 (very bad)	Rejected	2013
Motivation: The referee did not read the paper but he/she rejected the paper with una sentence without motivation.