2019.4.26 submission; 2019.6.14 major revision; 2019.8.22 revision and return; 2019.9.30 minor revision; 2019.10.23 revision and return; 2019.11.14 acceptance. There were four reviewers for the first time, three major revisions and one rejection. But the comments of the reviewer, who recommended rejection, were written very casually; probably because the content of the first revised manuscript was not marked, a reviewer’s comments were the same as the first time, and there was no problem after reinterpreting and marking.

(1) Thank | syan

2019.3.10, submission; 2019.6.20, major revision; 2019.7.4, submitted after revision; 2019.8.20 minor revision; 2019.8.2, submitted after revision; 2019.10.16, accepted.

(0) Thank | 托雷安娜

I think the speed is quite fast: submitted: 02/15/2019; review back: 04/28/2019; resubmit: 05/05/2019; accepted: 05 /26/2019.

(8) Thank | yhh93

Only one reviewer. Generally negative and demonstrated relatively minimal understanding of the topic. Very unfortunate.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

The publication is good, with a decent cost-performance ratio, and popular among Chinese scholars. It's a pity that the new section is not top-tier. In the future, it will be left behind by IJPE. What can we do? The second article also underwent peer review.

(0) Thank | zhangjnu

May I ask how long it will be until you have news? I've been waiting for a month with the editor!

(0) Thank | Xint6

Is everyone moving so fast, and I'm the only one with the editor who hasn't done anything for a month?

(0) Thank | Xint6

Decision pending. Acceptance on October 24th, 12 days later.

(0) Thank | zuhx

After submitting the manuscript for 4 months, I was invited to submit it for external review. After waiting for a long time with a pending decision, it was ultimately rejected. There were a total of two reviewers, one of whom was very unprofessional and provided 10 comments. It felt like they didn't really read the article, as the questions they raised were already addressed in the paper. They kept asking about the research motivation, method selection, and why certain variables were chosen. The other reviewer rejected the manuscript without providing any comments. What a disappointment.

(0) Thank | Eachen

How long does everyone wait for a decision pending? The second instance has been pending for 5 days.

(0) Thank | zuhx

There are a total of two reviewers, one of whom is very unprofessional. Their comments are as follows: The authors should respond to the review comments individually, rather than copying large portions of the manuscript content. The authors have not adequately addressed the concerns I raised in my first review, and I recommend rejecting the manuscript. Reviewer 1 provided 14 comments and recommended rejection. Even after responding to each comment individually, this feedback is completely incomprehensible. They kept asking about the research motivation and method selection, even though these were already detailed in the response. What does it mean to not respond to questions individually and to quote from the manuscript? Even if there were a few questions that were not answered satisfactorily, rejecting the manuscript outright is hard to accept. All the comments were purely subjective and did not offer any suggestions for revision. This feedback is entirely emotional and unprofessional. It is very irresponsible. I want to appeal to the editor-in-chief.

(0) Thank | Gemini Lu

I sent a follow-up email on July 27th, and then requested for revisions on the 28th. Both reviewers' comments were very mild, and the editor also provided around 10 suggestions.

(0) Thank | zuhx

Hello, may I ask if the figures and tables should be placed separately at the end of the article? Thank you.

(0) Thank | yiyi一

The first reviewer is relatively positive, while the second reviewer is more pessimistic. However, the second reviewer's comments were not very professional, so I will submit to a different journal. Interestingly, the second reviewer invited me to review a paper the day after rejecting mine.

(1) Thank | shaoshao0633

Is it necessary to submit the specified number of figures and tables to this journal? Can we exceed the limit? Thank you.

(0) Thank | yiyi一

Are we not allowed to exceed the number of figures and tables specified by the journal? Thank you.

(0) Thank | yiyi一

Can anyone tell me what "Decision pending" means after more than ten days? The paper was submitted for review on June 11th and the decision pending status appeared on July 4th.

(0) Thank | zuhx

May I ask what the alt-text and SDG keywords required by the journal mean, and how should they be provided? Thank you~

(0) Thank | Gemini Lu

How should the Alt-Text required by IJPR be handled? I don't understand this.

(0) Thank | 逸

Submitted 3 times and was rejected each time, but each time it would be reviewed, and rejection depended on the reviewers' opinions. This time the submission was overall better, with the following process:
Submitted in October 23; Major revision and resubmission in December 23; Major revision and resubmission in March 24; Minor revision in April 24; Accepted in May after minor revision. It took 7 months in total. All images for this journal require alt text, which I didn't know how to do at first. The review process was very fast

(0) Thank | 小龙

Do I need to pay for this journal?

(0) Thank | 鼬

Van Persie is really good at playing football

(1) Thank | 江海平

Two months really flew by

(0) Thank | weipu0214

Submitting a special issue for review, with 4 reviewers for major revisions in the first round and minor revisions in the second round, for reference:
1. Deadline for submission: 12/22/2022
2. Under review: 12/30/2022
3. Major revision due: 2/3/2023
4. Revised manuscript submitted: 3/3/2023
5. Minor revision due: 5/15/2023
6. Revised manuscript submitted: 5/30/2023
7. Acceptance: 6/12/2023

(1) Thank | 单纯小男孩

23-9-28 submit
23-10-23 reject The second reviewer was quite negative and criticized my work from beginning to end. I will submit to a different journal next

(0) Thank | 小乘佛法