|
|
Post by demographer on Nov 30, 2022 23:56:45 GMT -5
Has anyone submitted to Demography under the new editorial team at UW? How has been your experience in terms of review time?
|
|
|
|
Post by author on Jan 16, 2023 5:08:20 GMT -5
Very slow. My own and colleagues' experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slow on Feb 3, 2023 11:47:34 GMT -5
Slow compared to the previous team. Expect half a year for a 1st round review.
|
|
|
|
Post by oh wow on Feb 13, 2023 13:41:40 GMT -5
Half a year for 1st round review is really bad. Have others been finding the same? Deciding whether to submit something there now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slow on Mar 30, 2023 10:10:07 GMT -5
On the slower side at around 8 months wait for the 1st round. I have heard of journals that take even longer though…
|
|
|
|
Post by 8 months is awful on Apr 12, 2023 16:15:25 GMT -5
For Demography, that's really bad.
|
|
8 months is absurd!
Guest
|
Post by 8 months is absurd! on Apr 18, 2023 10:23:06 GMT -5
Wow, 8 months is unacceptable. 6 months is not OK, but there is no excuse for keeping people waiting 8 months.
Do more work to find reviewers or distribute reviews among editors or resign from editing the flagship journal of the discipline. Too many careers on the line to be keeping people waiting 8 months, then rejecting most of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by agree on Apr 18, 2023 15:02:25 GMT -5
I agree, 8 months really messes with people's careers. I wonder if there aren't enough deputy editors on the new team or maybe it's just the crisis hitting journals everywhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paula on Apr 23, 2023 18:55:07 GMT -5
Paula England complained on twitter. I’ve heard numerous complaints from friends since the new editorial team took over
|
|
|
|
Post by .... on Apr 23, 2023 21:08:32 GMT -5
2 months desk reject is bad but I've heard of a lot worse (i.e., a desk reject after 6 months) from Demography (not sure if it is the previous editorial team or the current one) and other top places. Maybe the whole peer-review system is not sustainable.
|
|
2 month desk reject?
Guest
|
Post by 2 month desk reject? on Apr 24, 2023 19:20:36 GMT -5
Wow, let's please not normalize sitting on a piece 2 months then desk rejecting it without even sharing reviews. Much less a grotesque 6 month desk reject. Anybody doing that needs to be named and shamed.
Thank you, Dr. England, for shaming Demography. This flagship journal has NO excuse. If the deputy editors can't handle it, get more deputy editors. I would share the work if I got the recognition, and so would many others!
"Paula England
@englandpaula
Journals sometimes use desk reject for things they see as not on an appropriate topic for the journal. The upside of this is that it saves you from wasting time waiting for full review. What I didn't expect from @readdemography
was a desk reject >2 months after submission.
12:40 AM · Apr 23, 2023
16.8K Views"
|
|
|
|
Post by 6 months on Apr 24, 2023 23:40:47 GMT -5
2 months desk reject is bad but I've heard of a lot worse (i.e., a desk reject after 6 months) from Demography (not sure if it is the previous editorial team or the current one) and other top places. Maybe the whole peer-review system is not sustainable. I’ve also heard a desk rej after 6 months under the current editorial team. Paula is lucky to get desk rej after only 2 months. |
|
