Archives of Sexual Behavior.
(Springer)
First round of reviews.
| Turnaround rate | 43 days (SD = 0) |
| Review length | 561 words (SD = 261) |
| Review quality | 4.5 / 5 (SD = 0.5) |
| 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 | 561 words (SD = 261) |
| Overall tone | Neutral (modal) |
| Knowledge | 3.5 / 5 (SD = 0.5) |
| Helpfulness | 4.5 / 5 (SD = 0.5) |
| Fairness | 4 / 5 (SD = 1) |
| Overall quality | 4.5 / 5 (SD = 0.5) |
| Editors | |
| Length | 72 words (SD = 0) |
| Decision | Reject (modal) |
| Plausibility | 2 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Helpfulness | 2 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Fairness | 3 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Overall quality | 2 / 5 (SD = 0) |
Comments
· Overall quality rating: 4 / 5 · Recommendation: 5 / 5
Reviews were very helpful thought the topic of the paper was at the fringe of ASEBS' scope. I guess thats why the editor declined the paper though reviews implied rather a major revision. However, the individual decisions by the reviewers were not included in the reviews so that only a guess.
Reviews were very helpful thought the topic of the paper was at the fringe of ASEBS' scope. I guess thats why the editor declined the paper though reviews implied rather a major revision. However, the individual decisions by the reviewers were not included in the reviews so that only a guess.
Suggest Journal
Missing a journal in our database? Suggest adding it below!
Send Suggestion