Communications: The European Journal of Communication Research.
(De Gruyter)
First round of reviews.
| Turnaround rate | 250 days (SD = 130) |
| Review length | 691 words (SD = 346) |
| Review quality | 4.8 / 5 (SD = 0.4) |
| Overall quality | 4 / 5 (SD = 1) |
| Would submit again | 2.5 / 5 (SD = 0.5) |
| Journal recommendation | 3.5 / 5 (SD = 1.5) |
(based on 2 reports including 4 reviews) |
|
Desk rejects. |
|
| Turnaround rate | n/a |
| Plausibility | n/a |
Reviewers & Editors (Initial Submissions)
| Reviewers | |
| Length | 691 words (SD = 346) |
| Overall tone | Positive (modal) |
| Knowledge | 4.8 / 5 (SD = 0.4) |
| Helpfulness | 4.5 / 5 (SD = 0.9) |
| Fairness | 4.8 / 5 (SD = 0.4) |
| Overall quality | 4.8 / 5 (SD = 0.4) |
| Editors | |
| Length | 67 words (SD = 0) |
| Decision | Minor Revision (modal) |
| Plausibility | 4 / 5 (SD = 1) |
| Helpfulness | 3.5 / 5 (SD = 1.5) |
| Fairness | 4.5 / 5 (SD = 0.5) |
| Overall quality | 4 / 5 (SD = 1) |
Reviewers & Editors (Successive Rounds)
| Turnaround rate | 54 days (SD = 7) |
(based on 2 reports including 2 reviews) |
|
| Reviewers | |
| Length | n/a |
| 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 | 5 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Helpfulness | 3 / 5 (SD = 2) |
| Fairness | 5 / 5 (SD = 0) |
| Overall quality | 4 / 5 (SD = 1) |
Comments
· Overall quality rating: 3 / 5 · Recommendation: 2 / 5
It took a year to receive the first round of reviews, then we were expected to submit our revisions within four weeks. Final decision was quick, but after eight months is still no publication date forthcoming...
It took a year to receive the first round of reviews, then we were expected to submit our revisions within four weeks. Final decision was quick, but after eight months is still no publication date forthcoming...
· Overall quality rating: 5 / 5 · Recommendation: 5 / 5
As the number indicate, my co-author and I felt positive about the review process. The reviewers were knowledgeable and helped to improve the quality of our manuscript. Dr. Kramp does a great job editing the journal, with timely responses and helpful comments on the reviews. The only negative comment we have with regards to the journal is that they were found to be unwilling to agree upon a standard author addendum that retains some basic copyrights. Aside from that, we very much recommend the journal and hope that they will revise their stance on author addendums.
As the number indicate, my co-author and I felt positive about the review process. The reviewers were knowledgeable and helped to improve the quality of our manuscript. Dr. Kramp does a great job editing the journal, with timely responses and helpful comments on the reviews. The only negative comment we have with regards to the journal is that they were found to be unwilling to agree upon a standard author addendum that retains some basic copyrights. Aside from that, we very much recommend the journal and hope that they will revise their stance on author addendums.
Suggest Journal
Missing a journal in our database? Suggest adding it below!
Send Suggestion