Although low quality of a paper may increase the time for review, this time depends also on many other factors and is very different for different journals.
Sometimes yes, otherwise no! If the article is so good it will be done so, if there are some questions, and the reviewer is not active ,it will take long time. Regards
Hi
i think when we complete the review of a paper within a short stipulated time ...that is 10-15 days and that too by the concerned expert..its quality gets refined and it adds value to the paper
Quality of a paper cannot be directly related to the length of the peer review period in a journal. Most journals give 15 to 30 days time for a single review. The willingness and availability of the reviewer play a crucial role to shorten or lengthen the review period. Another key factor is the activeness of the editor. Some editors take time to pass the manuscript to review process (with editor to under review) as well as does not take a decision immediately once the review reports are received (required reviews completed to decision in process). On the other hand, if the review period is too short (say few days time), it may indicate a compromise in peer review process and may be related to poor quality of the manuscript. This mostly applies to many new journals which came into the academic world in the last decade to operate completely on open access mode promising faster publication.
@Isaac Dinaharan
Are you saying if the review is completed in say 7 days, the review is not good? How long does it take to go through a paper if the reviewer is committed to the article?
A good reviewer can go through a manuscript is less than seven days, especially if the work is in an area in which the reviewer is versed. I don't think the number of days spent on a manuscript matters. @Musa Yakubu Tula
In Nigeria, 3-4 months duration is normal, In Asia and some parts of Europe 6 months to one year is normal for them. One can take a longer time and the quality of the paper still turns out to be bad and vise vasa. However, I feel the duration can play a part in shaping the quality of the work and the expertise of the reviewer on one hand is the major factor to be considered as a quality determining factor.
Hello Musa Yakubu Tula
I totally agree with those that say there is no relationship between quality of a paper/manuscript and the duration for review. With regard to your follow up question to Isaac Dinaharan , I say that the answer to the question is no. I say that from being a reviewer who leaves everything to the last minute when I am busy with a whole lot of other things.
This is the situation for me right now. Marking a few theses. Reviewing a pile of applications for something. Writing my own manuscripts. Trying to do some ethics applications. Updating some local guidelines. If you ask any of my friends/colleagues, I am terrible at being organised and, hence, reviewing manuscripts is often left to the last 2 days before deadline!
@ Joseph C Lee
I appreciate your straightforward and sincere answer
Hi,
The duration of a paper in a peer review process depends on the persons who are doing the reviewing. There are those who are emphatic to the feelings of a researcher who is waiting anxiously for the results of the review, and there are those who are indifferent. It has nothing to do with the quality of the paper.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Science
- Media
- Journalism