|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|
|Journal of Experimental Social Psychology||6.5 wks||6.5 wks||n/a||1||5 (excellent)||5 (excellent)||Accepted|
|Journal of Experimental Social Psychology||11.7 wks||n/a||n/a||2||2 (moderate)||1 (bad)||Rejected|
|Motivation: The main concern of the reviewers was the statistical power of our reported experiments. The manuscript included open data (and materials), so it was directly possible for the editor and both reviewers to confirm their suspicion. Alas, this did not happen. When I resubmited the paper to another journal, I made sure to include the observed power in the corresponding data analysis paragraph of my manuscript. Median power was .94.
The editor rejected the paper for the above-stated reason and because "the manuscript does not fit the theme of the journal". Needless to say, this was not a positive review experience for me. Apart from this major flaw, the reviews were short and without much substance, although they pointed out some interesting references to me. This is why I avoided the minimum rating of 0.