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	Positive (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