Speaker & Gavel.
(Delta Sigma Rho-Tau Kappa Alpha)
First round of reviews.
| Turnaround rate | 60 days (SD = 0) |
| Review length | n/a |
| Review quality | 3 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Overall quality | 4 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Would submit again | 3 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Journal recommendation | 3 / 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 | n/a |
| Overall tone | Positive (modal) |
| Knowledge | 3.5 / 5 (SD = 0.5) |
| Helpfulness | 3 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Fairness | 4.5 / 5 (SD = 0.5) |
| Overall quality | 3 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Editors | |
| Length | n/a |
| Decision | Minor Revision (modal) |
| Plausibility | 5 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Helpfulness | 5 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Fairness | 5 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Overall quality | 3 / 5 (SD = 0) |
Comments
· Overall quality rating: 4 / 5 · Recommendation: 3 / 5
This is not exactly a journal with a significant impact factor, but I've enjoyed some of the work published here. It gave my essay good visibility (it's accessible online for free), and allowed me to publish something that wasn't quite ready for a higher tier journal. At the same time, the journal has been around for about 50 years, and I have deep respect for its tradition (especially for a field that has been around just a little longer).
As for the review process, the editor (Stephen Croucher) was quick in getting the work under consideration and provided an excellent (and very reasonable) summary of what he thought the manuscript needed to get published. Both reviewers were fairly positive. One gave it a green light without many changes, the other had a few superficial recommendations. The review process wasn't very rigorous, but then again the manuscript was in decent shape. All in all, from the date of the first submission to the publication phase, this process took less than 6 months. If you're a senior scholar looking for a quick hit (perhaps with one of your students), or you're a promising student trying to get more experience with the publishing process, this journal should give you an excellent opportunity.
This is not exactly a journal with a significant impact factor, but I've enjoyed some of the work published here. It gave my essay good visibility (it's accessible online for free), and allowed me to publish something that wasn't quite ready for a higher tier journal. At the same time, the journal has been around for about 50 years, and I have deep respect for its tradition (especially for a field that has been around just a little longer).
As for the review process, the editor (Stephen Croucher) was quick in getting the work under consideration and provided an excellent (and very reasonable) summary of what he thought the manuscript needed to get published. Both reviewers were fairly positive. One gave it a green light without many changes, the other had a few superficial recommendations. The review process wasn't very rigorous, but then again the manuscript was in decent shape. All in all, from the date of the first submission to the publication phase, this process took less than 6 months. If you're a senior scholar looking for a quick hit (perhaps with one of your students), or you're a promising student trying to get more experience with the publishing process, this journal should give you an excellent opportunity.
Suggest Journal
Missing a journal in our database? Suggest adding it below!
Send Suggestion