JournalReviewer 

Poetics.

(Elsevier)

First round of reviews.

Turnaround rate 587 days (SD = 0)
Review length 490 words (SD = 72)
Review quality 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Overall quality 4 / 5 (SD = 0)
Would submit again 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Journal recommendation 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
(based on 1 report including 2 reviews)

Desk rejects.

Turnaround rate n/a
Plausibility n/a


Reviewers & Editors (Initial Submissions)
Reviewers
Length 490 words (SD = 72)
Overall tone Negative (modal)
Knowledge 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Helpfulness 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Fairness 4.5 / 5 (SD = 0.5)
Overall quality 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Editors
Length 1363 words (SD = 0)
Decision Revise&Resubmit (modal)
Plausibility 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Helpfulness 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Fairness 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Overall quality 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Reviewers & Editors (Successive Rounds)
Turnaround rate 98 days (SD = 0)
(based on 1 report including 1 review)

Reviewers
Length 50 words (SD = 0)
Overall tone Positive (modal)
Knowledge 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Helpfulness 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Fairness 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Consistency 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Overall quality 5 / 5 (SD = 0)
Editors
Length n/a
Decision Accept (modal)
Plausibility n/a
Helpfulness n/a
Fairness n/a
Overall quality n/a
Comments
  ·  Overall quality rating: 4 / 5  ·  Recommendation: 5 / 5
The first round of reviews took very long. I have heard that in this period (2013-2014), there were personal circumstances among the editorial board that could have caused such delay. When I resubmitted my article to them this year, however, the interval between submission and decision was far shorter than previously.

The reviewers and editor have all been very helpful in their comments, which has ultimately caused me to submit a better quality paper than I had sent them in the first place. Despite the delay I therefore found the review process with this journal helpful and professionally executed.






Suggest Journal

Missing a journal in our database? Suggest adding it below!