Coincido con el anónimo anterior. El material que se publica en MS es de primera. A mí me rechazaron un trabajo pero lo acompañaron con una revisión tan detallada que me permitió escribir una segunda versión muy superior que ha aparecido en una de las mejores revistas del campo.
Sin embargo, en el proceso hubo retrasos y malentendidos. Aún siendo responsabilidad de la revista, el editor fue bastante difícil.
La revista tiene editor nuevo desde 2011, así que habrá que ver si mantienen la calidad y de paso mejoran en el trato.
I have published twice with the journal both under the previous editor and the new one. The experience was generally positive. Good comments from reviewers and they were fairly responsive. The second time around when they were a little late on the response time I sent an email inquiring about it and received a quick response. I would echo sentiments about the journal quality. It has a good reputation.
Certainly the journal has a good reputation,perhaps especially in the area of history, but the review process was slow (over six months. One of the reviewers said they felt unqualified to read the article as it was outside their field which is a cause for concern.
I waited 10 months for a rejection from them, one of the readers accepted with R & R and the other was really quite a nasty (and may I say childishly worded) rejection. The editor opted for desk rejection and frankly 10 months is a long time to wait for a no. I’m not impressed with their inner workings, though the end product is good.
Muy poco formales. Desorganizados. La revista es buena pero no saben tratar muy bien a sus autores. Como lector para ellos la experiencia fue mejor.
Coincido con el anónimo anterior. El material que se publica en MS es de primera. A mí me rechazaron un trabajo pero lo acompañaron con una revisión tan detallada que me permitió escribir una segunda versión muy superior que ha aparecido en una de las mejores revistas del campo.
Sin embargo, en el proceso hubo retrasos y malentendidos. Aún siendo responsabilidad de la revista, el editor fue bastante difícil.
La revista tiene editor nuevo desde 2011, así que habrá que ver si mantienen la calidad y de paso mejoran en el trato.
I have published twice with the journal both under the previous editor and the new one. The experience was generally positive. Good comments from reviewers and they were fairly responsive. The second time around when they were a little late on the response time I sent an email inquiring about it and received a quick response. I would echo sentiments about the journal quality. It has a good reputation.
Certainly the journal has a good reputation,perhaps especially in the area of history, but the review process was slow (over six months. One of the reviewers said they felt unqualified to read the article as it was outside their field which is a cause for concern.
I waited 10 months for a rejection from them, one of the readers accepted with R & R and the other was really quite a nasty (and may I say childishly worded) rejection. The editor opted for desk rejection and frankly 10 months is a long time to wait for a no. I’m not impressed with their inner workings, though the end product is good.
¿Alguien sabe cuánto tardan en confirmer que recibieron tu manuscrito?