Psychological Methods.

(American Psychological Associations)

First round of reviews.

Turnaround rate n/a
Review length n/a
Review quality n/a
Overall quality n/a
Would submit again n/a
Journal recommendation n/a

Desk rejects.

Turnaround rate 9 days (SD = 0)
Plausibility 4 / 5 (SD = 0)
(based on 1 report)

Reviewers & Editors (Initial Submissions)
Length n/a
Overall tone n/a
Knowledge n/a
Helpfulness n/a
Fairness n/a
Overall quality n/a
Length n/a
Decision n/a
Plausibility n/a
Helpfulness n/a
Fairness n/a
Overall quality n/a
  ·  Plausibility: 4 / 5  (desk reject)
Our manuscript was desk-rejected because the editor felt it dealt with something too specific for the audience of PM. I've seen many other arguably more "specific" manuscripts successfully published in PM, but I am still not sour about the editor's decision simply because two wrongs do not make one right. Our manuscript was, in fact, fairly specific, and I am thus not really disappointed. I only wish the same rationale would be applied to other submissions made to this excellent journal.

Suggest Journal

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