Computers & Education.
(Elsevier)
First round of reviews.
| Turnaround rate | 68 days (SD = 0) |
| Review length | 128 words (SD = 0) |
| Review quality | 1 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Overall quality | 1 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Would submit again | 2 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Journal recommendation | 1 / 5 (SD = 0) |
(based on 1 report including 1 review) |
|
Desk rejects. |
|
| Turnaround rate | n/a |
| Plausibility | n/a |
Reviewers & Editors (Initial Submissions)
| Reviewers | |
| Length | 128 words (SD = 0) |
| Overall tone | Negative (modal) |
| Knowledge | 3 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Helpfulness | 1 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Fairness | 1 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Overall quality | 1 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Editors | |
| Length | 86 words (SD = 0) |
| Decision | Reject (modal) |
| Plausibility | 1 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Helpfulness | 1 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Fairness | 1 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Overall quality | 1 / 5 (SD = 0) |
Comments
· Overall quality rating: 1 / 5 · Recommendation: 1 / 5
After 5 to 6 weeks I got the decision of a reject based on a single reviewer.
The editor was anxious about the sample size and asked a "statistics expert" if the N was too small, because he didn't know. The so-called expert confirmed this, but without having any valid arguments.
In our response we were able to empirically and statistically disprove the "expert's" arguments, but he simply didn't care and ignored all the facts.
After 5 to 6 weeks I got the decision of a reject based on a single reviewer.
The editor was anxious about the sample size and asked a "statistics expert" if the N was too small, because he didn't know. The so-called expert confirmed this, but without having any valid arguments.
In our response we were able to empirically and statistically disprove the "expert's" arguments, but he simply didn't care and ignored all the facts.
Suggest Journal
Missing a journal in our database? Suggest adding it below!
Send Suggestion