Short and Concise Titles Reflecting Core Content

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

I am looking forward to meeting you in person and discussing the details of our collaboration

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Is there a template for writing the title of an article?

(0) Thank | 八坂篷蔚

What kind of title can impress reviewers?

(0) Thank | 北国博达

Review speed: 2.0 | Submission hit rate: 50.0
Experience sharing: Recently submitted a small article, still under review, with a good impression of the editor and reviewers. Submitted on February 7th, reviewed on March 10th, no comments from the reviewer, with some originality, but required revision and resubmission. Revised and resubmitted on March 13th, returned on March 20th with comments from one reviewer, requesting further revisions and resubmission. Resubmitted on March 25th, reviewed on May 10th, with feedback from 2 reviewers for major revisions. Revised and returned on May 14th, currently waiting for the next decision.
Experience: 1. It is important to find a kindred spirit for your manuscript. Although it is a small sample retrospective analysis with many flaws, I believe it has originality, which was recognized by the reviewers and editors, giving it a chance for revision. 2. Even though it is a low-impact journal, the reviewers are highly professional with a rigorous attitude, which is impressive. Their thoroughness has significantly improved both my thinking process and the quality of the manuscript throughout the multiple revisions. Special thanks to the professional and diligent editors and reviewers. I hope this manuscript, after enduring numerous challenges, will be accepted!!!

(0) Thank | Boris Chaplin

Review Speed: 2.0 | Submission Hit Rate: 50.0
Experience Sharing: Recently submitted a short article, still under review, feeling very positive about the editors and reviewers. Submitted on February 7th, reviewed on March 10th, no comments from the reviewers, but some originality was acknowledged, requesting revisions and resubmission. Modified and resubmitted on March 13th, returned on March 20th with comments from one reviewer, requiring further revisions and resubmission. Resubmitted on March 25th, reviewed on May 10th, with feedback from 2 reviewers, major revision required. After revising on May 14th, waiting for further updates.
Reflections: 1. It is important to find a reviewer who appreciates your work. Although it is a small retrospective analysis with many flaws, I believe it has originality, which was recognized by the reviewers and editors, providing the opportunity for revisions. 2. Even though it is a low-impact journal, the reviewers demonstrated a high level of professionalism and strictness, which was quite moving. This dedication led to significant improvements in both my thinking process and the quality of the manuscript during the revision process. Special thanks to the professional editors and reviewers. Hopefully, this manuscript, after undergoing numerous revisions, will be accepted!!!

(0) Thank | Boris Chaplin

Overall, the review is not very slow or fast, or the self-introduction is slightly higher

(0) Thank | Stillman

Overall, the review process is average, not too slow but not fast either. The self-citation rate is slightly higher

(0) Thank | Jocelyn Albert

Review speed: 6.0 | Submission success rate: 75.0 Experience sharing: I submitted an article in July last year. It wasn't until February this year that I received the review comments. It was really slow. If you are in a hurry, be cautious about submitting. In March, after checking the status, it showed "approved." I was not sure if it was accepted. So I wrote a letter to inquire about it. The journal replied 20 days later saying that it was accepted and asked me to wait for the professor. I am not sure when that will be. Anyway, despite the slow process, everything else was fine

(0) Thank | Rudolf More

So-so, as long as I can graduate, it's okay. My senior published a paper last year and successfully graduated, so everything will be fine

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁