Pudding77 2023-03-13

2022.11.16 Submission received
2022.11.17 Initial technical check
2022.11.25 Peer review
2023.01.03 Major revision
2023.01.14 With editor
2023.01.16 Peer review
2023.03.10 Accept

Actually, the process started quite quickly, including the first review which was acceptable. There were three reviewers, and they took a little over two months to provide their feedback, stating that a major revision was needed. One of the reviewers gave their approval, while the other two combined had only 14 suggestions. I thought that after less than a week of revisions, we would have a result. However, the editor struggled with one of the reviewer's comments and sent it back to them. The reviewer took a week to respond, but the editor was on vacation. I had to wait until March 1st, with the status showing "1 Reviewer report received," and couldn't resist urging the editor. They replied that they were on vacation until March 1st and would accept the manuscript on the 10th, once back to normal work.

Overall, this journal seems to be relatively niche, with not too many submissions. There are no specific requirements for the formatting of the layout, but Springer's new submission system is really unreasonable. If we disregard the unexpected vacation of the editor, the speed is actually quite good, and the impact factor is increasing rapidly. I hope the journal continues to improve!

IF=100 2021-11-15

Is the journal demanding? What type of article did the original poster write? Which type of article is more likely to be accepted?

chai 2021-10-06

Excuse me, does this journal require a page fee?