1 good report and 1 not so good. Very constructive comments in the 1st round, quicking converging in the 2nd round. Process a bit slow. overall satisfied with the dispute process in terms of speed and fairness. But I'm not in any club and not at an elite school (by choice). Extremely fast. Fast turnover. Learn More About Katia. Results not important enough to a broad audience. All excellent reports, and good suggestions from the co-editor about what to focus on and where to send next. Said they would refund the submission fee, which is nice. We tried to do everything we were asked to and also had a major overhaul of the data. Editor (Partridge) was very helpful and was de facto a 4th referee. 2 weeks). 4 weeks for desk rejection is too much. The associate editor was very helpful in terms of what needs to be done. fair comment. Except when I have coauthored with someone who is at an elite school, I've been desk rejected every time at QJE. 1 reject and 1 R&R. 6 months after that paper online. Overall fair process. Desk rejected in 1 week. Very negative experience. Terrible experience. It took me 7 months to recieve a major revision required; however, my second revision is accepted in just 2 weeks!! Non professionalism of editor and referee: one referee asked to modify the paper and upon seeing the changes did reject saying that I should have done the way it was done in the first place. Two rounds of R&R! Very helpful feedback that made this a better paper. Not general interest. Editor decided one returned report was sufficient, though this report did not provide any helpful comments. Reports were split. Referee report was reasonable and improved the paper. Very tough journal with very extensive comments from 3 refs. Fast response time. Fair and quick process. The second one is more critical and seems to be angry by the fact that I'm not citing his work. Report from ref1 and AE were very helpful. R&R, then reject. rejected after 5 months of 'reviews completed'. Some not so fair. Desk rejected in less than one month. Great experience overall, Editor decided not to wait for the late referee not to slow down the process. Desk rejected after a bit more than two weeks without comment. Quite upsetting. But at least fast. Would not bother again. Referees do not seem to have read the paper well, poorly written reports. very good experiencefast and helpful comments from the co-editor and two refereesAverage time between the submission and response is about 1.5 months, well run journal. Less than a month for two strong referee reports on a non-experimental paper: useful suggestions and some parts of the paper were obviously not clear enough, although no intractable issues so rejection was disappointing. Desk Reject in 2 weeks for not general interest enough. I'm over the moon, great experience ! Editor clearly read the paper and claimed a referee did too. BTW, "Under review" all the time during the reviewing process, similar to AEA journals (but different from some other journals using manuscript central). 3 rounds then rejected by editor, paper was improved by addressing reviewers' comments, eventually accepted at RFS, Cam Harvey gave useless report; obvious outgoing editor is obvious. Recommended field journals Clueless editor thinks results are of narrow interest. Very fast reject and they sent my check back. 2 weeks for 2 high quality ref reports. The paragraph/comment not constructive. Environment, Development, and Sustainability. 1: 1: We have moved! Secodn editor waited almost 6 weeks after receiving the referee reports. Constructive and very specific. Dual submission to a conference, the submission fee is quite high. 2021-2022 Job Market Candidates | Economics Department Probably I was a bit lucky the 2 referees liked the idea of teh paper sicne ti was a bit sort and basically asked me to do some mreo stuff. Two rounds of R&R. The editor wrote the 2nd report. but i think it is an important one that should be considered a bonafide econ journal. Education, Labor, Gender, Development and Public Policies. quick process, helpful reports and editor comments, Kind reject from the editor after a week, providing reasons why the paper was rejected, 6 months to receive 2 reports. Our results didn't change. Good comments from referee and editor after five months. Rejected due to lack of signficant contribution, fair assessment. Some useful comments, others seemed like alibi. paper rejected after one round of R&R due to extremely negative attitude of the one referee. The referee did not understand the basic assumption of the model. Economics Job Market Rumors Off Topic Technology. Desk reject after 27 days by Kurt Mitman. We give the editors one week to judge the overall contribution and if acceptable send your paper to an associate editor. When we chased, we received detailed referee reports and R&R quickly, but were given just 2 weeks to make massive changes to the paper - we withdrew and used comments to publish elsewhere. This journal is a bit hell to make it attractive to authors in order to get their money easily. A complete waste of time and a scandalous process!! The peer review process was fast. Solid referee report and very quick response. Good experience overall. Good handling by the editor (Reis). Young Economist Rankings | IDEAS/RePEc - Research Papers In Economics When he rejected the paper for the Economic Systems, he then asked me to submit the same paper to his journal "Emerging Markets Finance and Trade." After waiting for more than 5 months I got 0 Referee reports and a rejection based on very loose comments. The paper was not a good fit for the journal and another journal was recommended. Some unfair comments about replicating what other papers have done (which are already discussed in the paper!) Competent referee reports, although one of them extremely hostile. Articles/sites of interest for students on the Job Market. Fast turn around; reviewers gave substantive comments. Unfortunately, they called out the problems that I was already aware of / do not have a good way of fixing. A year after submission without result? I stopped reading after that). Think about submitting again. ), Vienna University of Economics and Business, Ceccarelli (Zurich/Maastricht), Pitkjrvi (Aalto), Assistant Professor in Labor, Migration, and Racial Capitalism, Western University (formerly University of Western Ontario), Gallant (Toronto), Sullivan (Yale), Cui (UPenn), Choi (Wisconsin-Madison), Kahou (UBC), Hentall-MacCuish (UCL), Babalievsky (minnesota), Moszkowski (Harvard), Hong (Wisconsin-Madison), Pan (UT Austin), McCrary (UPenn), Gutierrez (University of Chicago), Kwon (Cornell), Zillessen (Oxford), Ba (UPenn), Assistant, Advanced Assistant, Associate, or Full Professor of Economics, E0 -- General F3 -- International Finance F4 -- Macroeconomic Aspects of International Trade and Fin. I don't know what to add. Very fair. Referee's only objection is flat out incorrect (i discussed report with colleagues in my field). Not because of the decision but due the letter content. Disappointed it wasn't sent out for review, but can't fault them for speed! Apparently the assigned coeditor left and paper got stuck. Mess with the submission, as they were changing editors. Nice rejection letter. One month later received rejection with a low quality review. In any case, after having contacted the editorial office the staff there were really nice and helpful and contacted the editor on my behalf. editor said the paper had too much economics, The editor was very helpful to summarize what he thought should be done from 4 referee reports. Will never submit unless the editor is changed to an economist, Referees did not put much efforts. not a fair process. Students on the Job Market - NYU Stern - New York University R&R, took forever, reports mentioned but not provided, not responsive to emails. Mathematics Jobs Wiki - NotableMathWiki - UC Davis Same referee takes about half an hour to conclude the math is wrong, yet takes 5 months to submit his report. Unfortunately the paper is rejected but I hope the reports help you improve the paper for another journal. The worst experience so far. (It doesn't seem like a club journal. One helpful, not sure the other really read the paper, Pol Antras and ref's high quality jobs (class act comp. Nothing substantial to improve the paper. Good experience. I am just not part of the club. Some good comments from reviewers, but all focused on marginal issues. Economist 64dd. Good experience. Very weak reports. oh they're good! Use widely accepted methods. Desk rejected in 10 days because the editor wasn't a fan of the data. Delays related to second reviewer. Awfully slow. Only had to face one reviewer in the second round. You needed 2 months to tell me that? Reject and resubmit. Good experience. The paper was not sent to the referee but instead the editor said it was reviewed by the editorial board. Very polite desk rejection. And I've recently reviewed a closely related paper for the EER that got a revise-and-resubmit, so you'd think the topic must be interesting enough. Good report. Two years later still waiting for referee reports. Very slow. Bit disappointing given the high fee. To avoid. Both referees suggested papers to be cited in the literature review, which seem like their own papers. Appreciate fast review and efficient process. All of them are much speedier and you will actually get helpful comments that will improve your paper. Six months to respond. After 7 months of waiting. The AE report made no sense at all, and had very little substance. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting. Disgraceful! Reject. Extremely bad experience with this journal. Would submit here again, editor was fair and kept things moving along. Desk reject within a 10 day but editor provided a short 'referee' report mentioning five issues. Overall good experience. If you are an employer who would like to post hiring status information for positions at your institution, please contact EconTrack to register. If this journal wants to publish high quality papers, it needs to pick someone better than Joerg Baten who actually reads the papers before he accepts/rejects, etc. R&R only takes one week. Very useful suggestions by the editor who read the paper carefully. It took too long, I do not know if I would submit there again. Then the referee gave their answer in 2 weeks. One referee was thoughtful and recommended acceptance; Second referee asked for more results; AE agreed with the 1st referee. Shame on Co-Editor. 6 months to desk reject with little reason. Still, refreshing for honesty.