|
|
Post by information on Dec 11, 2013 15:08:22 GMT -5
Just curious if anyone can share any recent past experiences.
I'm particularly interested in hearing about average review times and experiences with reviewers.
Thanks in advance for any help you can provide.
|
|
|
|
Post by Anything on Jan 10, 2014 12:30:03 GMT -5
Anyone?
|
|
|
|
Post by JEMS on Jan 18, 2014 18:19:39 GMT -5
Great experience with JEMS. The editors sent it out to two reviewers, who both replied very promptly. I had a review within 2.5 or 3 months. They gave one month to do edits, but the editor gives you very direct advice as to how to address comment reviewers. Within a few days of resubmission, I got an acceptance. All journals should be this professional.
|
|
Different Experience
Guest
|
Post by Different Experience on Feb 17, 2014 9:56:29 GMT -5
I had the misfortune of catching them this past summer when they were changing editorial teams. I waited for 6 months (admittedly not the worse wait time in the world) to get rejected on the word of one ambiguous review. Hopefully now that the new team is firmly in place, it should be better, but I would be very reluctant to submit to them again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Information on Dec 1, 2015 17:10:47 GMT -5
What have your experiences been like recently with reviewers and review times for JEMS? The last post was in Jan 2014.
|
|
|
|
Post by JEMS on Dec 2, 2015 12:34:21 GMT -5
What have your experiences been like recently with reviewers and review times for JEMS? The last post was in Jan 2014. Information is from this year. Fast review process. Somewhat bad reviews (i.e., not helpful nor particularly clear). One review had wikipedia links (not kidding). Published after one round of revisions. Editor was friendly and efficient. |
|
|
|
Post by Info on Dec 4, 2015 10:47:18 GMT -5
Thanks for the info! Wikipedia links, seriously? I always advise students that Wikipedia is an untrustworthy source and to never use it for research nor cite it in their papers. It's not a legit source.
To have that much faith in the information on a Wikipedia page, the reviewer must have contributed to that Wikipedia page in some way. I bet his/her work is/are probably cited on that Wikipedia page! I worked with a professor many years back who was obsessed with his Wikipedia page and every Wikipedia page referencing his research. His Wikipedia page and the links on that page were actually legit because he was contributing to the information on that page. On rate your professor dot com, his students commented on how he made them read his Wikipedia page in lecture! He's famous and proud of being on Wikipedia.
|
|
