Journalism Studies.
(Routledge)
First round of reviews.
| Turnaround rate | 125 days (SD = 59) |
| Review length | 149 words (SD = 44) |
| Review quality | 2.5 / 5 (SD = 1.5) |
| Overall quality | 3 / 5 (SD = 2) |
| Would submit again | 3 / 5 (SD = 2) |
| Journal recommendation | 3 / 5 (SD = 2) |
(based on 2 reports including 2 reviews) |
|
Desk rejects. |
|
| Turnaround rate | n/a |
| Plausibility | n/a |
Reviewers & Editors (Initial Submissions)
| Reviewers | |
| Length | 149 words (SD = 44) |
| Overall tone | Negative (modal) |
| Knowledge | 3 / 5 (SD = 2) |
| Helpfulness | 2.5 / 5 (SD = 1.5) |
| Fairness | 3 / 5 (SD = 2) |
| Overall quality | 2.5 / 5 (SD = 1.5) |
| Editors | |
| Length | 179 words (SD = 0) |
| Decision | Reject (modal) |
| Plausibility | 3.5 / 5 (SD = 0.5) |
| Helpfulness | 2 / 5 (SD = 1) |
| Fairness | 4 / 5 (SD = 1) |
| Overall quality | 2 / 5 (SD = 1) |
Comments
· Overall quality rating: 5 / 5 · Recommendation: 5 / 5
Since my co-authors and I got very positive reviews with only minor revisions, I really don't have anything to complain about or to critize. The review process was really fast and some aspects of the fair and informed reviews were actually helpful. However, one review consisted largely of "yes"-answers to the questions of the review sheet. It would have been helpful to have some advice on how to edit the manuscript to match the word count. The editors comment on the manuscript had the length of two sentences. The rest of the comments concerned formal aspects. Which is, I suppose, due to the many manuscripts this journal receives. All in all, the editor of this journal and his assistant were helpful, professional and very nice - I would definitely recommend to a colleague submitting to this journal :)
Since my co-authors and I got very positive reviews with only minor revisions, I really don't have anything to complain about or to critize. The review process was really fast and some aspects of the fair and informed reviews were actually helpful. However, one review consisted largely of "yes"-answers to the questions of the review sheet. It would have been helpful to have some advice on how to edit the manuscript to match the word count. The editors comment on the manuscript had the length of two sentences. The rest of the comments concerned formal aspects. Which is, I suppose, due to the many manuscripts this journal receives. All in all, the editor of this journal and his assistant were helpful, professional and very nice - I would definitely recommend to a colleague submitting to this journal :)
· Overall quality rating: 1 / 5 · Recommendation: 1 / 5
Journalism Studies is a well-regarded journal in communication. However, my experience, and the experience of at least two other colleagues, is that some of their reviewers are awful and childish. In addition to my experience (described above), one of my colleagues received a very short review written in bad English in ALL CAPS. It is quite possible that the reviewer sent his or her comments in via mobile phone.
Articles sent to Journalism Studies are often also reviewed for Journalism Practice and the newer Digital Journalism. However, if you look carefully at the authors published in these journals you will see a pattern of regularly recurring names.
Journalism Studies is a well-regarded journal in communication. However, my experience, and the experience of at least two other colleagues, is that some of their reviewers are awful and childish. In addition to my experience (described above), one of my colleagues received a very short review written in bad English in ALL CAPS. It is quite possible that the reviewer sent his or her comments in via mobile phone.
Articles sent to Journalism Studies are often also reviewed for Journalism Practice and the newer Digital Journalism. However, if you look carefully at the authors published in these journals you will see a pattern of regularly recurring names.
Suggest Journal
Missing a journal in our database? Suggest adding it below!
Send Suggestion