All reviews received by SciRev

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
PLoS Genetics 2.5
weeks
3.5
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted
Motivation: The review process was very quick and efficient. The reviewer's suggestions improved the quality of the manuscript immensely.
Theory and Decision n/a n/a 7.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization n/a n/a 3.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes n/a n/a 33.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization n/a n/a 18.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Mitochondrion 8.9
weeks
8.9
weeks
n/a 1 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: Very quick handling of resubmitted manuscript after we had thoroughly addressed reviewer comments.
WIREs Climate Change 10.1
weeks
23.6
weeks
n/a 2 3
(good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Economics Letters n/a n/a 149.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
American Journal of Sociology 38.0
weeks
38.0
weeks
n/a 4 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Rejected
Motivation: The website suggested a processing time of 16 weeks, it took 38. The reviews were pretty good be considerably different in strength and the overall verdict was not clear given the different opinions of the reviewers.
Science and Public Policy 10.6
weeks
20.6
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: Fair review reports, and fair duration for review. This journal is efficient and handles manuscripts in a proper way.
International Journal of Manpower 11.6
weeks
11.6
weeks
n/a 2 2
(moderate)
1
(bad)
Rejected
Motivation: One review was very good, well reasoned and constructive. The other reviewer gave no comment at all and recommendet reject without giving any reasons. This should usually motivate editors to have a closer look.
British Educational Research Journal n/a n/a 30.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
School Effectiveness and School Improvement 10.4
weeks
10.4
weeks
n/a 2 5
(excellent)
4
(very good)
Rejected
Urban Education 24.7
weeks
24.7
weeks
n/a 3 2
(moderate)
1
(bad)
Rejected
Motivation: I feel the reviewing process took way too long and although both reviewers were very enthousiastic about my manuscript, since they pointed out a lot of positive points and had only minor remarks, my manuscript was just bluntly rejected without offering me the opportunity to revise it. Although I think both reviewers were in favour of doing this (as they mentioned suggestions for revision in their comments).
Science Translational Medicine n/a n/a 1.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Science n/a n/a 4.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Nature Chemical Biology 6.1
weeks
14.6
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Rejected
World Development 15.3
weeks
15.3
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Rejected
Journal of Medical Ethics n/a n/a 24.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Economics Letters 5.9
weeks
5.9
weeks
n/a 1 3
(good)
5
(excellent)
Accepted
Motivation: Fast and efficient.
Psychiatry Research 20.0
weeks
20.0
weeks
n/a 1 4
(very good)
2
(moderate)
Rejected
Motivation: Providing a single reviewer opinion in 4.5 months seems to me highly inefficient. Otherwise the content of the review was fair.
Semantics and Pragmatics 16.0
weeks
50.0
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted
Motivation: The reviews were of high quality and always led to a significant improvement of the article. The editorial work was likewise excellent and very careful. The editors cared about the contents a lot, they didn't just function as "translators" of the reviewers' views.
Child Abuse Review 20.4
weeks
31.9
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Accepted
British Journal of Political Science n/a n/a 8.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 23.0
weeks
23.0
weeks
n/a 1 3
(good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Motivation: There were quite a few changes required from the editors, but all reasonable and straight forward to implement.
Swiss Political Science Review 2.6
weeks
3.4
weeks
n/a 1 3
(good)
4
(very good)
Accepted
Motivation: A very speedy and efficient process.
Population, Space and Place n/a n/a 13.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Demography 13.4
weeks
13.4
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
5
(excellent)
Rejected
American Sociological Review 15.1
weeks
15.1
weeks
n/a 3 3
(good)
3
(good)
Rejected
Population and Development Review n/a n/a 33.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
European Sociological Review 35.6
weeks
45.9
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Motivation: The first round was lengthy but the subsequent rounds were fast and efficient.
Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 12.4
weeks
12.4
weeks
n/a 3 3
(good)
3
(good)
Rejected
Motivation: Two reviewers either did not understand the paper or were intentionally blocking it.
Social Science Research 14.1
weeks
26.6
weeks
n/a 1 4
(very good)
2
(moderate)
Rejected
Motivation: During the review process, the editor changed. The first editor was quite enthusiastic about the paper (revise and resubmit). But the new editor not so much (reject in the second round).
"Not liking the paper" is a fair judgement, but it should not be changed during the review process...
Political Studies 17.1
weeks
29.9
weeks
n/a 2 2
(moderate)
2
(moderate)
Rejected
Motivation: One reviewer liked the paper, the other one did not. That's always a difficult starting point, but we changed the paper substantially to take on board the second reviewer. After the revisions, the second reviewer still didn't like it and added new criticisms including many that are blatently wrong. Sadly the editor didn't pick up any of this. Given that the journal doesn't do multiple rounds of revisions, that's it.
American Journal of Political Science n/a n/a 1.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Desk rejection, but very fast (1 day) and with reasons clearly stated and a range of alternative outlets suggested.
Journal of Marriage and Family 14.4
weeks
14.4
weeks
n/a 2 4
(very good)
4
(very good)
Rejected
De Economist 1.0
weeks
1.3
weeks
n/a 1 3
(good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Motivation: This was for a special issue, which might explain the quick review and decision.
Political Analysis n/a n/a 40.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: They suggested LSQ as a journal with a more substantive (rather than methodological) focus.
Social Science and Medicine n/a n/a 3.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Health and Place n/a n/a 10.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)