Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
13.0 weeks
21.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2015
22.1 weeks
31.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2014
Motivation:
The entire review process went pretty fast. The reviewer comments were quite positive, and it was not too difficult to revise and resubmit the manuscript.
13.0 weeks
13.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
Rejected
2013
Motivation:
The single reviewer who advised rejection wrote about the "interesting" aspects of our ms, but then offered three minor objections (one of which was that a table was oddly placed!). The concerns could have been addressed in a revision so I did not feel the objections warranted rejection. I think we deserved a chance to respond to the reviewer's suggestions. When I asked the Editor for additional feedback I received no reply. Rejecting a ms on the basis of one poor quality referee report is unprofessional.