How long do you take to review a conference/Journal paper?
According to my experience I need 2 to 4 weeks to review a paper, since I conduct reviewing while doing many other tasks.
According to my experience, I felt it took normally a week or 2 at most before the deadline. No matter how long has the review time a week perhaps enough if there is no big argument and of course it took longer while doing simultaneous tasks :-)
I am in agreement with Mohammad Shidujaman, i.e. it takes me about a week!
It depends on the paper itself. It usually takes me one week as a minimum and three weeks as a maximum.
I totally agree with the previous answers. It usually takes me about 1-2 weeks.
Mohammad Shidujaman Completely agree with you. The time would be depended on simultaneous tasks..
Ali Hasan Ali Thank you for the comment. Agree with your opinion.
It takes two weeks to review a conference/Journal paper critically.
Madhukar Baburao Deshmukh Thank you for the comment. I also agree with it..
It will be a less than a week time, if we are not committing in any other assignments
I do not like to extend my review over multiple days. I can read the manuscript and make initial notes in 2-3 hours. After that, it depends on what feedback I need to make, but whenever possible, I do the entire review all the same day. For example, I might spend my day on a Saturday reviewing one paper.
Michael W. MarekThank you very much for sharing your way of reviewing. According to my experience, sometimes I also have done the same way. I also have submitted my review results within a few days after accepting the review request.
It depends on my schedules. It may take between a day and a month
Kindly check https://www.editage.com/insights/how-many-weeks-after-submitting-a-manuscript-is-it-a-good-time-to-email-editors-of-statistics-methodsapplications-journals-about-when-to-expect-the-reviews?amp
I review only journal papers, but not books. I usually give it a week (in average) per item.
it depends of the quality of a reviewed manuscript. If the manuscript of good quality, the reviewing work takes one day. If a manuscript requires more efforts to review, it may take several days, a week, several weeks; depending how busy I am during that period. That's why I do not like to receive a paper for reviewing with a short one-week dead-line. I will not be able to do a good quality reviewing in case if a manuscript requires more attention.
M.K. Tripathi Thank you for the comment. I hope it is a reasonable duration.
Nanki Nath Phd
Thank you very much for your comment. Yes, I also think so, sometime review time is depended on the contents of the paper as well.
Chinaza Godswill Awuchi I can also understand well about comments. Our response sometimes may delay when we are under tight schedules.
George Stoica Thank you for the comment. It looks like a good method to reduce the review burden. But, sometimes reviewing journal papers may be more time consumed than conference papers.
Roman Croitor Thank you very much for your comment. To make a good review, we have to have enough time. In my case, when I am not very busy, I accept one-week review requests. Otherwise, I also refuse a one-week review.
An interesting question. I typically treat reviews with urgency (just like I would love for my papers) and usually accept only reviews for journals indexed in SCOPUS, WOS or both.
Because most of such reveiews get to me because of my previous PUBLICATIONS in the subject area, 1 week is enough to give constructive comments on a submission.
Timothy Omara Thank you for the comment. You look like a very active reviewer since you can give constructive comments within a week.
Ali A. Al-Homaidan Thank you very much for your comment. Can understand your feeling well.
"A qualified reviewer devotes about 2-3 hours reviewing a 10-page conference paper, and 5-10 hours reviewing a 12-page journal paper."
Dear Chinthaka Premachandra
Usually, it does not take more than a week.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Science
- Media
- Journalism