Journal Submission Wiki

Report a BugDiscuss Add Row +
Journal Result First Response Avg time between R&R No. Referee Reports Notes Year Submitted Added
Abstracts of Working Papers in Economics Pending 1 2 1 2015 07/03/15
Abstracts of Working Papers in Economics Accepted 13 3 2 2015 12/10/14
Abstracts of Working Papers in Economics Accepted 1 2 1 ghj 2014 12/06/14
Abstracts of Working Papers in Economics Accepted 0 1 0 ewewewe 2015 06/29/15
Abstracts of Working Papers in Economics Ref Reject 0 2 0 2015 12/08/14
Acta Applicandae Mathematicae Accepted 1 3 1 hjgh 2013 12/10/14
Administration and Society Pending 0 N/A 0 2014 12/12/14
Administration and Society Accepted 2 3 1 hjty 2013 12/09/14
Administration and Society Accepted 0 N/A 0 2010 12/12/14
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Accepted 0 1 2 Awesome experience. 2 weeks for 2 high quality ref reports. Editor then said with a quick/thorough response and no need to go back to refs. Good strong editors. 2012 04/18/13
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 some useful comments, but clear that the referee didn't spend a lot of time on the paper, nor take much effort to follow bits of it that weren't conventional. 2015 05/20/15
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 3 3 2 Two reports of middling quality. Both the referees pimped their own tangentially related paper (yes, the same one). At least the turnaround was quick. 2012 04/28/14
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Very efficient process. Two excellent referee reports. Editor read the paper, added some comments of her own. 2011 04/28/14
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 good reports 2012 06/13/14
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Poor quality single report. Clearly done day before deadline. Editor did seem to have read the paper, possibly in more detail than the referee who comments several thing that was included in paper. Expected a bit better. 2015 06/22/15
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 6 weeks 2013 09/23/13
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 12/30/12
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 0 N/A 1 2 weeks, ok ref report 2012 12/24/12
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 ~5 weeks. Okay referee reports. Editor read the paper too and added some short comments. One ref decided to the opportunity to pimp their own working paper. 2014 09/20/14
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Bad experience overall, although the reports came quickly. The reports were largely useless. One referee for sure did not read the paper as pointed things which were actually in the paper. The other referee was of low quality. Sadly, from the comments of the editor it was clear that she did not read the paper careully either, otherwise she would not have written the coments we got on the rejection letter. Good to be fast, but quality of feedback should be taken care of more at this journal. 2014 08/17/14
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 4 1 2 Bad to useless reports after a longish delay. One referee openly mentioned s/he doesnt like the method used in the paper. The other clearly did not understand what is going on and wrote some junk. Clearly, this journal is the main outlet for randomized trial papers and not much else. 2014 11/26/14
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Nice words from Editor. Ref reports quite useful 2014 03/12/15
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 2012 12/21/12
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Very good referee reports - largely positive but requiring some modifications, deleting one section. Editor also read the paper and took the call - explained that the paper was better suited at a good field journal given referee assessments of contribution to literature. Process seemed very fair. 2013 12/04/13
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 01/02/13
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Within 2 day. 2013 07/11/13
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject after about 10 days 2013 07/07/13
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Editor rejected on the basis of being too narrow. 2014 07/17/14
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Rejected in 24 hrs, no reason given. No evidence that the editor read even the abstract. But then again it was my fault, I didn't run an experiment! 2014 07/14/15
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 2011 08/02/13
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 12/23/13
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/22/12
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Got desk reject within 2 weeks. Rejection based on fit. Apparent that editor read the paper. 2015 05/21/15
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in one week 2014 03/03/15
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Accepted 2 2 2 Excellent referee reports, with useful input from the editor (Auerbach) regarding how to handle them. Wonderful experience overall. 2011 04/30/13
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Accepted 3 4 2 2011 12/20/12
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 Two straightforward R&R recommendations from referees. Editor rejected based on own concerns. 2014 07/17/14
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 2013 02/18/14
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 2012 12/25/12
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Weak reports with many assertaions that were simply untrue. Yet editor made some good comments. 2013 03/11/14
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 In-depth, high quality referee reports. Tone of the reports harsher than at better journals. 2012 04/29/14
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 very very good reports 2012 01/01/13
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in 6 hours. Recommended field journal, and it was in fact eventually published in the top field journal. 2012 07/07/14
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 editor obviously read the paper (indicated by reference to appendix figure in the letter); nice and helpful comments 2014 11/11/14
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2014 06/03/14
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected within 6 hours. 2012 12/21/12
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Very quick response. Editor obviously read over the paper and gave a couple of helpful comments. 2012 01/08/13
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 12/23/13
American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Accepted 6 1 3 Great experience. Referees and editor reports were incredibly useful 2012 02/21/14
American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Good experience. Fast and serious journal. Fair points by referees 2014 04/04/14
American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Editor (Rogerson) makes some encouraging comments but cannot hide the fact that the referees were not really that enthusiastic about the paper, even if they couldn't find much to criticize. Would submit again. 2014 10/09/14
American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Overall experience is good. The editor read the paper carefully and made helpful comments. One report very useful, and the other two not that much. 2014 10/24/14
American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 2011 12/22/12
American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2012 03/26/13
American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Very good experience. Good feedback from AE too. 2012 01/21/13
American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Shitty ref report. He only mentioned that I failed to mention a lot of papers who were all by the same person 2012 07/13/13
American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2011 12/22/12
American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2011 08/02/13
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Pending 3 N/A 2 2012 12/24/12
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Accepted 3 3 1 Good report + Editor's detailed comments 2012 10/02/13
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Accepted 3 2 1 It was quick and efficient. 2013 06/22/15
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Accepted 6 5 2 Very good comments from both the reviewers and editors. 2010 02/28/14
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 One useless report, but the other one is decent. 2015 06/14/15
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 2011 01/01/13
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 The paper is not GREAT enough for AEJ Micro!!! 2015 04/13/15
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2012 01/10/13
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2010 10/02/13
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Good reports. 2012 06/07/13
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 No connection= rejection 2015 04/13/15
American Economic Review Pending 4 N/A 3 high quality reports 2014 12/14/14
American Economic Review Pending 0 N/A 0 Submitted more than 2 months, still shown the status as "under ADM" 2012 01/22/13
American Economic Review Pending 0 N/A 0 2014 01/12/15
American Economic Review Accepted 3 1 3 2012 05/08/13
American Economic Review Accepted 5 10 3 5 months first RR, 5 months second RR, 2 weeks final acceptance 2010 12/21/12
American Economic Review Accepted 6 6 2 2010 12/22/12
American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2012 12/21/12
American Economic Review Ref Reject 8 N/A 2 2012 12/20/12
American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Good referees 2012 03/18/13
American Economic Review Ref Reject 6 N/A 3 A fair process. 2011 04/02/14
American Economic Review Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Shitty reports; one ref only wrote 2 sentences. 2009 01/29/13
American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Was a longshot. Getting a reference to AEJ Applied was worth it. 2014 03/31/15
American Economic Review Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
American Economic Review Ref Reject 3 3 3 One referee said "take it", two said "we dislike coauthor, he published something similar in psych journal, do not take". 2013 09/19/13
American Economic Review Ref Reject 8 N/A 3 3 polite reports say it is interesting but too simple for aer 2013 01/15/14
American Economic Review Ref Reject 5 N/A 3 2012 11/01/13
American Economic Review Ref Reject 5 N/A 0 2010 08/02/13
American Economic Review Ref Reject 7 N/A 3 2012 05/15/13
American Economic Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Good comments, well rejected 2013 04/06/13
American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2011 12/20/12
American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 2013 07/05/13
American Economic Review Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 One very good, detailed, and positive report. The other negative and low-quality. The low-quality report won out... 2014 07/01/15
American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 4 3 All referee reports were gave entirely stylistic comments with no real grounds for rejection. Kinda pissed. 2014 10/16/14
American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2011 12/20/12
American Economic Review Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2012 12/27/12
American Economic Review Ref Reject 8 N/A 4 8 months of wait, for nothing 2014 02/16/15
American Economic Review Ref Reject 8 N/A 3 nothing special. referees said "nice but not great" 2013 02/20/14
American Economic Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 One decent report. Two short ones that showed no effort whatsoever. 2014 07/24/14
American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2012 01/09/13
American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2013 06/19/13
American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 one month desk reject. 2012 02/28/14
American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 less than 2 weeks, recommended field journal 2015 07/15/15
American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Recommended a field journal by the editor. 2013 06/11/13
American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Kind words by editor 2012 12/24/12
American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Moffitt desk rejected, suggested a field journal. 2010 01/11/13
American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 1 2012 12/21/12
American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 1 2012 12/21/12
American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2011 12/20/12
American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Not enough contribution 2014 05/12/14
American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/25/12
American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2011 12/21/12
American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Took about two weeks. Editor appeared to have at least glanced at the paper. 2009 01/29/13
American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Kind words by editor, though weird reasoning 2012 04/04/13
American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 About a week to desk reject 2015 08/01/15
American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 8 days to desk rejection. Suggested a field journal 2012 07/13/13
American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Quick return, nice words. 2015 06/03/15
American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 not even a nice word :'( 2012 01/29/13
American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject in 2015 04/07/15
American Journal of Agricultural Economics Accepted 3 3 2 Quick reviews, reasonable comments. 2012 02/28/14
American Journal of Agricultural Economics Accepted 2 2 2 One good referee report. The other referee has no idea what I am doing. 2012 10/02/13
American Journal of Agricultural Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2012 08/02/13
American Journal of Agricultural Economics Ref Reject 3 3 2 Rejected after revision, very good comments in initial round. Ref #1 created new issues after I addressed his first round. 2013 09/03/14
American Journal of Agricultural Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2 mildly positive reviews, editor shot it down 2014 08/07/14
American Journal of Agricultural Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 one good, one bad 2012 08/02/13
American Journal of Agricultural Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 One very good review, two quite missed points. Some helpful comments. 2012 04/25/13
American Journal of Agricultural Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 Just one referee report. Referee says R&R, but editor decides to reject outright. Useless comments. Not surprised to hear that the impact of the journal is going down. 2013 06/21/14
American Journal of Health Economics Accepted 3 1 2 Very good comments from both reviewers and the editor, Frank Sloan. Frank asked us to revise two more rounds after the reviewers are OK with the paper. I have to admit that Frank is the best editor I ever met. Strongly recommend this journal for health economists! 2014 03/12/15
American Law and Economics Review Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 Worst experience of my life. One referee does not follow simple math, immediately assumes the model is wrong and the editor takes his side. Same referee takes about half an hour to conclude the math is wrong, yet takes 5 months to submit his report. The other referee recommended revision. 2014 04/23/15
American Political Science Review Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 2005 08/02/13
Annales d'Economie et de Statistique Accepted 6 1 2 2006 08/03/13
Annales d'Economie et de Statistique Accepted 0 N/A 2 2006 08/03/13
Annales d'Economie et de Statistique Accepted 4 3 2 Excellent reports 2012 09/24/13
Annals of Finance Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 one good, one bad 2012 01/14/13
Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy Accepted 5 1 2 2013 10/09/13
Applied Economics Pending 10 N/A 0 After 10 months, my manuscript was still listed as "awaiting referee assignment", and no one at the journal would respond to my e-mails about the paper, so I withdrew it. Complete waste of 10 months and $200. Journal is basically a scam now. 2013 07/15/14
Applied Economics Accepted 4 N/A 2 Excellent referee report with excellent suggestions. Fast response and quality report made me satisfied. Wasn't my target journal but I'll take the pub in a recognizable outlet. 2011 08/02/13
Applied Economics Accepted 2 2 2 Very efficient, good reports. One referee read the paper line by line and gave constructive comments. The other referee was also good and liked the paper. 2014 09/30/14
Applied Economics Accepted 4 2 2 2014 06/04/15
Applied Economics Accepted 4 1 2 2014 10/16/14
Applied Economics Accepted 4 2 1 Great experience. A good referee report and very efficient editor. 2013 07/16/14
Applied Economics Accepted 5 2 1 A bit slow, but good comments by the referee. The paper was accepted quickly after revision. Overall, good experience. 2013 12/18/14
Applied Economics Accepted 0 N/A 0 10 days, very efficient, nice editor 2013 04/22/13
Applied Economics Ref Reject 15 N/A 2 After waiting for 1 year and 3 months, I received 2 reports. One is a R&R type, and the other referee said that he was not interested in the topic, nothing about the details of the paper. Will never submit to Applied Economics any more.. 2010 07/15/14
Applied Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2014 05/27/14
Applied Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Nothing more frustrating than paying to submit a paper that was desk rejected after 2 months with no reason given for rejection... 2014 12/18/14
Applied Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 "I find the overall contribution too small to justify publication in AEJ" 2014 11/18/14
Applied Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 "I find the overall contribution too small to justify publication in AEJ" 2014 11/18/14
Applied Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in a week. 2012 02/01/13
Applied Economics Letters Accepted 1 1 1 Unbelievably fast and helpful. Much better than plain vanilla Economics Letters. Editor was respectful and not full of himself. 2014 01/16/15
Applied Economics Letters Accepted 0 N/A 0 Accepted after two weeks 2010 07/26/13
Applied Economics Letters Accepted 6 1 1 6 months to first response, then a two sentence ref report, one sentence of which was clarified extremely quickly and one that entailed a ton of extra work. Good points, though, and overall a good experience. Much better than regular EL. 2014 05/14/15
Applied Economics Letters Ref Reject 0 N/A 1 Paper rejected based on the editor's phone conversation with the referee. 2013 07/31/13
Applied Financial Economics Pending 0 N/A 0 Still waiting 2012 05/09/13
Applied Financial Economics Accepted 7 N/A 0 Acceted as is; not a single change requested. 2013 09/25/14
Applied Financial Economics Accepted 7 1 1 After major r&r, accepted in 2 days 2013 11/11/13
Applied Financial Economics Accepted 7 1 2 It took me 7 months to recieve a major revision required; however, my second revision is accepted in just 2 weeks!! Very efficient indeed!!!!!!! 2012 09/17/13
Applied Financial Economics Accepted 8 1 1 After r&r, accepted in 2 days 2012 10/16/13
B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Accepted 2 2 1 RR with major changes, then RR with minor changes, then accepted after 1 week. Referee report good, though annoying as "#$"# on one point. Didn't let it go, Editor told him to "#"# off and published the paper anyway. Helpful comments from the editor (besides the usual thy shall cite my papers). Good experience. 2013 07/17/14
B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 After waiting for 6 months, I sent a polite email to the editor asking if the paper fell through the cracks. Got a rejection within a couple of days. The rejection came with a useless referee report. 2014 04/03/15
B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 2011 01/11/13
B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Ref Reject 1 N/A 0 Ref rejected in 3 weeks. Fair report but not anything that couldn't be corrected in R&R. Rejection came on Easter morning. 2015 04/06/15
B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 One referee report was very good; the second was also modestly helpful. 2012 04/07/13
B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in one day. They kept the application fee. 2012 12/21/12
BE Journal of Theoretical Economics Accepted 2 2 2 One (very) useful report and one useless, 5 months from submission to acceptance 2011 01/01/13
British Journal of Industrial Relations Accepted 13 3 1 Editor had serious problems in getting referee reports although on this topic there should have been at least 20 potential referees 2009 01/07/13
Bulletin of Economic Research Pending 16 N/A 0 I haven't received the first response yet. Nothing to add... 2013 03/21/15
Bulletin of Economic Research Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2013 03/19/14
Bulletin of Economic Research Ref Reject 8 N/A 2 Bad experience waiting for and ultimately receiving two relatively useless reviews for a comment/note (paper < 10 pages including title/abstract page, references, and tables). 2014 05/28/15
Cambridge Journal of Economics Accepted 6 6 2 good reports, great editor who replies promptly to queries 2012 05/18/13
Cambridge Journal of Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 First experience with this journal. One referee gave very constructive comments, but referenced three papers by same person (I'm guess that's who referee was). Second ref put thought into it but was of a heterodox stripe that I'm not. And mentioned class struggle. Never would have won that person over. 2014 04/29/15
Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 One referee provided lots of helpful comments and even some ideas for future research. They also indicated that the paper was better suited to a a different journal. The other report was useless. 2014 04/20/15
Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Two fair reports. 2014 01/24/15
Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 One referee gave lots of great comments, while the other referee was pretty much useless. 2014 12/12/14
Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 12/20/12
Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Very good referee reports. 2014 05/07/15
Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 2011 01/19/13
Canadian Public Policy Accepted 2 N/A 3 2015 07/03/15
Canadian Public Policy Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2012 12/20/12
China Economic Review Pending 2 N/A 1 very quick 2014 02/20/14
China Economic Review Pending 2 1 2 2014 08/22/14
China Economic Review Accepted 2 1 1 2014 04/21/14
China Economic Review Accepted 2 1 1 very efficient process 2014 06/04/15
China Economic Review Accepted 4 2 2 Good reports. Quick responds. Awesome experience. 2014 10/23/14
China Economic Review Accepted 2 1 2 2014 09/11/14
China Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/25/12
China Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
China Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/27/12
Computational Economics Accepted 1 1 1 possible that the editor reviewed it himself, but was a fairly straightforward accept, trivial revisions only. smooth in general. 2015 07/14/15
Computational Economics Accepted 12 2 2 Fair and helpful reviews. 2012 09/16/14
Computational Economics Accepted 1 1 1 possible that the editor reviewed it himself, but was a fairly straightforward accept, trivial revisions only. smooth in general. 2015 07/14/15
Computational Economics Accepted 6 1 1 2009 01/04/13
Computational Economics Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 Took 3 month for a simple "out of scope" notification!! 2015 06/10/15
Contemporary Economic Policy Accepted 2 2 2 Very good clarification and additional comments from Associate Editor 2012 10/11/14
Contemporary Economic Policy Accepted 3 3 1 Outstanding referee reports. 2011 01/26/13
Contemporary Economic Policy Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 one of the reports was literaly 3 sentences. Although the other referee was positive, editor rejected it 2015 04/07/15
Contemporary Economic Policy Ref Reject 6 2 2 Two referee reports, one critical, one encouraging. Then one round of R&R and second referee changed his mind. Still my favorite rejection of all time - used Shakespeare in a footnote, and first referee (whose English was subpar) said that the footnote was "very poorly written." To summarize, this reviewer apparently thought he had better English than Shakespeare. Comical journal. 2012 01/16/15
Cuadernos de Econom?a Accepted 1 1 1 All good, minor additions were suggested. 2014 06/04/15
Decisions in Economics and Finance Accepted 28 3 1 2006 12/22/12
Defence and Peace Economics Accepted 3 3 1 Good communication with the editor, very helpful referee report 2012 12/05/13
Defence and Peace Economics Accepted 4 1 2 very good communication with the editor 2015 06/07/15
Demography Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Deputy Editor rejected the paper with insufficient contribution and a comment that doesn't make sense. 2014 07/28/14
Demography Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 desk rejection because it is not a good fit and i am asked to send it to an economic journal --- while i mainly discussed with a very nice sociologist when writing this paper. 2014 07/07/14
Demography Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Six weeks for a desk reject with no reasons offered 2013 01/14/14
Development and Change Pending 0 N/A 0 2 months, the article is still under internal review... 2015 03/13/15
Development Studies Accepted 3 3 2 2 reviewers, 1 poor, 1 quite demanding and useful. Two rounds of R&R! 2014 11/18/14
Development Studies Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 7 days no comments 2012 12/21/12
Eastern Economic Journal Accepted 2 1 2 Very helpful comments from reviewers. 2014 07/25/14
Eastern Economic Journal Accepted 4 3 2 good reports. fair and timely process. 2013 06/13/14
Eastern Economic Journal Accepted 0 1 2 Expedient. Excellent comments from reviewers 2013 07/25/14
Eastern Economic Journal Accepted 3 3 2 Helpful referee reports. Good experience, great turnaround. 2013 12/18/13
Eastern European Economics Accepted 3 3 0 The article was accepted by the referees 2007 09/07/14
Ecological Economics Accepted 4 4 3 14 months from submission to publication online. In print a couple of weeks later. 2010 12/21/12
Ecological Economics Accepted 2 4 4 2009 01/09/13
Ecological Economics Accepted 4 4 3 Detailed and useful referee reports 2010 01/22/13
Ecological Economics Ref Reject 12 N/A 1 2010 12/20/12
Ecological Economics Ref Reject 4 4 2 Very bad reports from non economists. Political interests there, i will not submit to this journal ever again 2013 06/30/14
Ecological Economics Ref Reject 5 3 3 Rejected after first re-submission, too demanding referees 2012 04/16/13
Econometric Reviews Accepted 4 6 2 One reviewer seemed to think a clean accept, one was 'not really convinced'. Editor gave me chance to convince other referee. 2013 10/28/14
Econometric Reviews Ref Reject 14 N/A 0 Unacceptable waiting time. The referee reports were crap (minor points without really saying anything about the research question, the methodology and the results of the paper). After 10+ years in a research institution, counless submission, countless rejections, and some papers published in highly ranked journal, this was definitely my worst experience ever. 2013 11/06/14
Econometric Theory Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Positive: 1 high quality referee report and some comments by the co-editor; Negative: 2 other referee reports of medium to very low quality 2015 05/29/15
Econometric Theory Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 very good reports 2013 03/18/14
Econometrica Accepted 4 4 3 2008 11/17/13
Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Good reports, not extremely helpful, but good 2015 05/26/15
Econometrica Ref Reject 6 N/A 3 2013 11/01/13
Econometrica Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 good referee reports 2012 05/03/13
Econometrica Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Two very helpful reports and encouraging letter from AE 2012 03/05/13
Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 12/28/12
Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 All three referees are weak on maths 2014 02/11/15
Econometrica Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 2010 01/11/13
Econometrica Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Two referee reports very useful, pointing to the same concerns, one of them quite positive and friendly, providing numerous pathways to pursue in the future. Third report seemed written by a sage speaking in amharic, most statements were elliptical in nature, and we were left wondering what the referee's point had been. On the whole very good experience. 2015 05/03/15
Econometrica Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Fully ignorant referees 2014 02/11/15
Econometrica Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 2012 12/20/12
Econometrica Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 reports not very insightful 2012 01/25/13
Econometrica Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 very good referee comments 2013 12/31/14
Econometrica Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 02/15/13
Econometrica Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 06/03/13
Econometrica Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 desk reject with very short referee note 2014 12/22/14
Econometrica Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Fair decision. Useful letter from the editor. 2014 04/30/15
Econometrics Journal Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 Referees basically thought contribution was too small to merit publishing. 2012 10/28/14
Econometrics Journal Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 The contribution of the paper as it stands to be insu¢ cient for publication in The Econometrics Journal. 2014 05/12/15
Econometrics Journal Desk Reject 0 1 0 Desk rejection in 6 minutes with a "pretended" letter, which could be used for any paper. The editor claimed that himself and another associate editor read the paper. Unbelieveble how fast some journals work!!!!! 2013 06/21/14
Econometrics Journal Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2014 11/06/14
Economic Development and Cultural Change Accepted 3 6 2 Journal response was quick. Took about 2.5-3 months for first response which detailed a lot of work - two R & R decisions, each of which took about 2 months for referees to get back on. 2011 12/04/13
Economic Development and Cultural Change Ref Reject 8 N/A 1 One report from which you learn nothing 2012 03/07/13
Economic Development and Cultural Change Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 almost useless and the editor is too slow. 2013 05/27/14
Economic Development and Cultural Change Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Low-quality reports. 2014 11/06/14
Economic Development and Cultural Change Ref Reject 6 N/A 3 2012 04/16/13
Economic Development and Cultural Change Ref Reject 12 N/A 2 Long wait but not a bad experience overall, referee comments were useful. 2013 03/05/14
Economic Development and Cultural Change Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Very good experience. Two referees were lukewarm but couldn't really point out too much that was wrong. Editor (Fafchamps) not just claimed to have an Associate Editor read it, but we got a whole page of useful comments from the AE. 2014 05/03/15
Economic Development and Cultural Change Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Mentioned that they do not consider theoretical papers. Duh 2013 07/13/13
Economic Development and Cultural Change Desk Reject 4 3 2 Two very useful ref reports in the first round. Worked butt off to respond to them. Editor decided to not even send the revised paper back to the referees. What a terrible journal. Nonder they are going down in ranking in Dev Econ steadily 2013 06/01/15
Economic Development and Cultural Change Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Very polite editor. 2014 03/05/14
Economic Inquiry Pending 4 7 2 2 referee reports: first one, r&r; second one, reject and resubmit. editor read the paper and decided to give it an r&r. 2014 03/11/15
Economic Inquiry Pending 4 N/A 0 Awaiting Referee Selection for 4 months! Ughhh...I will probably withdraw the submission 2014 11/17/14
Economic Inquiry Accepted 3 3 2 Very useful referee reports. Professional editor. 2012 11/20/14
Economic Inquiry Accepted 3 2 2 The referees responded very quickly and with excellent, high quality reports. Co-Editor has read the paper carefully, offered detailed comments and a lot of help. 2012 07/27/14
Economic Inquiry Accepted 4 5 2 2008 12/21/12
Economic Inquiry Accepted 12 4 2 2011 12/24/12
Economic Inquiry Accepted 2 N/A 2 very efficient 2013 06/19/13
Economic Inquiry Accepted 2 N/A 2 superfast handling 2013 05/29/14
Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Mediocre assessment from referee with some helpful suggestions. Editor agreed = reject. 2013 04/17/14
Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 12 9 2 still waiting for the outcome of the second round. Worst experience with a journal so far. 2012 11/03/14
Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 7 N/A 1 After seven month the co-editor rejects the paper based on a report which is terrible. The referee did not understand the basic assumption of the model. Complete waste of time. 2014 05/10/15
Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 13 N/A 3 Very long wait. 1 positive and 1 negative report. Editor sent a peper to a 3rd ref, which took forever to write another negative report. 2010 02/03/13
Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 2014 04/22/14
Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 16 12 1 Most inefficient handling ever. Shame on Co-Editor. 2008 02/03/13
Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 4 months with the editor before being sent to referees. 3 more months for two reports containing blatant mistakes and outrageous claims that have nothing to do with the paper. I suspect either grad students or people outside of the field. Either way, unacceptable for a journal that charges submission fees. 2014 01/28/15
Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Very fast and fair process, despite the negative outcome. 2013 11/06/13
Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 5 8 2 Worst experience so far. Long wait to hear back, the referees got changed, and then the editor rejected it based on issues that were known from the beginning. Do not submit there. 2013 11/03/14
Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2010 01/02/13
Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Fast Resposne in 10 week. One referee report that likes the research question but does not like thr approach. The main sugguestion is to come up with a theoretical model and erase half of the work done. Editor claims he agrees witht he referee but does not add an argumentation. It would be a positive experience if submission were free. 2014 02/05/15
Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 One excellent referee report, and one decent one. Good experience overall 2014 04/23/14
Economic Inquiry Desk Reject 4 N/A 0 4 months for a desk rejection based on what it appears to be a very superficial reading of the abstract. Unacceptable for a journal that charges submission fees. 2014 10/28/14
Economic Inquiry Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk Reject in 2 weeks for not general interest enough. Editor recommended field journal submission. 2015 02/13/15
Economic Inquiry Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 The editor handling the paper had no idea about the literature. He made the most stupid argument to reject the paper. Commented that something we are doing is not correct, while all the papers in the field are doing the same. One of the papers has over 3000 citations. The least the editor could have done is to assign another editor. 2014 05/12/14
Economic Inquiry Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2014 09/17/14
Economic Inquiry Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 2012 12/27/12
Economic Journal Pending 4 N/A 2 one very good report 2012 01/25/13
Economic Journal Accepted 4 1 2 Excellent work by den Haan, providing even better feedback than two (good) referees. 2012 07/31/14
Economic Journal Accepted 5 1 2 2011 12/21/12
Economic Journal Accepted 4 5 2 good reports; excellent editor who acts like an additional referee. 2012 11/09/13
Economic Journal Accepted 5 2 2 All reports were useful and very demanding 2011 03/19/13
Economic Journal Accepted 3 3 2 Quick process, very solid reports and editor comments. 2013 06/18/14
Economic Journal Accepted 4 1 3 2012 08/02/13
Economic Journal Ref Reject 1 N/A 0 A fairly high quality report, useful, within 24 days. Will submit again (other work, of course) on the basis of professionalism and treatment. High quality editing. 2013 07/17/14
Economic Journal Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 one so-so report and one excellent report 2013 01/23/14
Economic Journal Ref Reject 3 N/A 4 2013 01/29/14
Economic Journal Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 1 good report, 1 bad one, decent turnaround time 2015 06/30/15
Economic Journal Ref Reject 8 N/A 3 2013 02/12/14
Economic Journal Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 very useful referee reports 2012 08/02/13
Economic Journal Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2013 06/14/13
Economic Journal Ref Reject 3 3 2 Referees did not seem to like the paper based on the subject. Referees did not show good knowledge of the subject. Paper was poorly read by the referees. 2014 10/13/14
Economic Journal Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Fast desk reject (Ciccone), after few days. Was nice, encouraging, and motivated his decision to reject. 2012 02/18/13
Economic Journal Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Dest rejected in three days. "In order to speed up and improve the submission process for both authors and referees, we have raised the number of papers that we reject without seeking reports." 2015 03/26/15
Economic Journal Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Quick, professional, very acceptable decision. 2013 08/12/13
Economic Journal Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 justified decison with kind and informed letter from the editor 2015 04/30/15
Economic Journal Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 3 week desk reject. Referred to field, seems editor at least scanned and maybe even read the whole thing. Sad result, but not unfair appraisal. 2015 03/09/15
Economic Journal Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Bad experience overall. I needed to contact the editorial office to know who the editor was, if the paper was sent to referess and etcc, and this after more than a month that the paper was submitted. Notice that I submitted there on the basis of the widely publicized (EEA Gothenburg) fastness of this journal. In any case, after having contacted the editorial office the staff there were really nice and helpful and contacted the editor on my behalf. At the time the editor had still the paper sitting on his desk. After two weeks we got a desk rejection with a very impersonal letter which made us think that the editor did not even read the intro. Overall I think this journal should get a more diverse editorial board. Some people are simply too narrow in the scope of their research to be editors of a journal which claims to be of "general interest" 2014 08/17/14
Economic Journal Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Economic Journal Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject - referred to field journal 2014 12/08/14
Economic Journal Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Took a little over a month for the desk reject and no refunds. 2015 06/17/15
Economic Journal Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2011 12/31/12
Economic Modelling Pending 0 N/A 0 waiting 30 months for response, editor not responding to inquiries 2012 08/08/14
Economic Modelling Pending 36 12 1 2011 04/23/14
Economic Modelling Pending 0 N/A 0 waiting 19 months as of today, sent 3 reminfers, Hall nor anybody else from the journal havent responded so far to any of my emails 2013 08/12/14
Economic Modelling Pending 36 N/A 0 Withdrew article from consideration after 18 months of wait. 2013 02/09/15
Economic Modelling Pending 24 N/A 0 short straightforward paper, should take max 2 hours to read carefully,still under review, editor (Hall) non-responsive 2012 06/02/14
Economic Modelling Accepted 3 2 2 2012 01/11/13
Economic Modelling Accepted 4 1 2 2011 01/11/13
Economic Modelling Accepted 6 1 1 Difficulties to reach the editor, but useful report and very fast decision (1 day) after submitted the revised manuscript. 2013 10/31/14
Economic Modelling Accepted 5 3 1 Everything fair. 2012 04/20/13
Economic Modelling Accepted 3 1 3 2012 01/04/13
Economic Modelling Accepted 3 1 4 2012 12/20/12
Economic Modelling Accepted 9 4 2 Hall is an inefficent editor 2014 10/25/14
Economic Modelling Ref Reject 9 N/A 1 After waiting for 9 months, I sent an email to the editor asking about the paper status. Got a rejection within a couple of days without any constructive comment. 2013 04/14/15
Economic Modelling Ref Reject 6 6 1 I had a paper that was to be revised and the review was very positive. This was after a 6 month wait and emails to the editor to follow up. Revised carefully and resent, then they sent to another editor and another reviewer whose report contradicted the first and was very vague. The second editor rejected it. Process lasted one year with nontransparent, contradictory review process. 2014 02/07/15
Economic Modelling Ref Reject 13 N/A 2 Held my paper for a full year and rejected it on a split decision with one ref suggesting an RR and the other a reject. Paper has since been published. 2010 08/02/13
Economic Modelling Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Editor efficient, but strange experience: Two referees were very favorable, but the third referee rejected by quoting a "flaw" which was in fact correct. The policy of the journal is to let each author appoint the referees, which improves speed on one hand but generates citation groups on the other hand. In a word, this is not a serious journal. 2012 04/23/13
Economic Modelling Ref Reject 13 N/A 1 Special issue editor started to referee himself. Comments didn't make sense. Editor did not intervene and kept hiding throughout. Shameless people. 2012 02/26/14
Economic Modelling Ref Reject 10 3 2 After 10 months waiting, I had a revise and resubmit decision. The referee report was very positive, requiring only one major change that was successfully done. After resubmission, I was informed that the paper would be sent to another editor (Prof. Mallick). After another three months, the paper was reject on the basis of a presumed 2nd referee report, only with a few lines, that says the paper is "well structured, well written, and deploys sound econometric methodology", but "does not add value to the existing literature". It seems to me that this was an easy way for the new Editor to reject the paper! 2013 03/20/15
Economic Systems Accepted 3 3 2 Very good experience. Quick and professional handling by the editor. Two very useful referee reports. 2011 12/13/13
Economic Theory Accepted 2 2 2 Economic Theory Bulletin. Great experience - referee reports really helped improve the paper. Also very fast. 2014 05/06/15
Economic Theory Accepted 2 1 2 Weird editor pushing for a change in the results. 2011 02/04/13
Economic Theory Accepted 5 4 2 2013 11/03/14
Economic Theory Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Very quick response. Serious referee report, but without any helpful particular suggestion 2013 05/17/13
Economic Theory Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 Very unprofessional. Referee's only objection is flat out incorrect (i discussed report with colleagues in my field). No comments from the unknown handling editor. Seems as though they did not like the content and were looking for an excuse to reject. 2015 06/26/15
Economic Theory Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 Very unprofessional. Referee 2015 06/26/15
Economic Theory Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 2010 01/10/13
Economic Theory Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Three reports, one good report the other two average. Overall, fair process. 2015 06/24/15
Economic Theory Ref Reject 6 6 1 It took six months for a single referee report (of exactly one paragraph of comments). Referee clearly did not read paper closely because the bulk of his (limited) comments focused on why I don't address an issue that is addressed prominently in the introduction. 2014 06/10/14
Economic Theory Ref Reject 14 N/A 1 Good report, positive rec. from AE, but editor rejected without explanation. 2011 11/06/13
Economic Theory Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2014 (the option is missing) 2013 01/20/14
Economic Theory Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2011 08/02/13
Economic Theory Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 07/30/13
Economic Theory Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 2011 08/02/13
Economic Theory Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 04/04/13
Economic Theory Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 The editor suggest that the paper is not good enough for ET! Suggested to send to another journal! oh they're good! 2014 09/25/14
Economica Pending 36 N/A 0 Desk did not want to communicate at all. 2010 04/29/15
Economica Pending 6 N/A 2 2014 08/22/14
Economica Accepted 7 2 2 2011 12/20/12
Economica Ref Reject 9 N/A 3 Two of three referees did not read the paper. Many thanks, however, to the third referee for instructive comments. No further comment from the editor. 2011 02/11/15
Economica Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Reports are thoughtful and useful for revisions 2014 07/26/14
Economica Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Economica Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Poorly managed. Theory in one field sent to AE in another field doing empirics. 2013 02/20/13
Economica Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 2010 01/07/13
Economica Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 ridiculous 2013 06/14/13
Economica Desk Reject 6 N/A 0 SIX MONTHS for a desk reject. Do not submit to this journal. 2014 08/15/14
Economics and Human Biology Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 03/28/13
Economics and Human Biology Desk Reject 0 1 0 Spent a week rewriting the paper according to requests of the editor ("put figures in the end of the paper" and such), then got a desk reject. 2013 11/27/13
Economics and Human Biology Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Quickest desk rejection ever experienced. 2 minutes passed between receiving editor name an receiving desk rejection. Don't think they even bothered reading the first page. 2013 09/06/13
Economics and Philosophy Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2013 05/13/13
Economics and Politics Pending 0 N/A 0 Submitted July 2012, short empirical paper, still waiting for first response. 2012 04/21/13
Economics and Politics Accepted 7 3 1 Very useful report 2013 09/17/14
Economics and Politics Accepted 3 4 2 Very useful reports, also doing some editing 2010 01/04/13
Economics and Politics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Referees ask for the revised paper; editor rejects the paper 2012 02/20/13
Economics and Politics Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 Referee had positive comments and suggested revise and resubmit, but editor rejected it. 2014 12/06/14
Economics and Politics Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Disappointing referee: a few useful comments, but mostly low-grade and somewhat hostile 2011 02/21/13
Economics Bulletin Accepted 4 2 2 The editor was very helpful. 2014 04/28/15
Economics Bulletin Accepted 1 1 1 Very fast process. Poor report but good comments from the associate editor 2011 05/01/14
Economics Bulletin Accepted 1 1 2 Very fast and easy, but useless reports and editors (which is what I wanted for a quick worthless pub) 2012 11/06/13
Economics Bulletin Accepted 0 N/A 0 Editor accepted the article within one week. 2014 04/30/14
Economics Bulletin Accepted 1 1 1 Very fast good report 2013 10/18/13
Economics Bulletin Accepted 3 1 1 the website was hacked...the report was good, and the associate editor is very nice 2014 04/22/15
Economics Bulletin Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 One referee report with no constructive comments. Waste of time 2010 12/05/13
Economics Bulletin Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 Referee does not understand the purpose of the paper, clearly not a specialist of the field ; published elsewhere 2012 10/31/14
Economics Letters Pending 1 2 1 Easy Process. Very Fast. 1 Month from Submission to a very positive R&R 2015 04/17/15
Economics Letters Accepted 4 1 2 2011 01/13/13
Economics Letters Accepted 1 1 1 Pretty quick. Serrano handled it. 2011 04/12/13
Economics Letters Accepted 8 1 1 2010 02/13/13
Economics Letters Accepted 3 1 1 2012 12/21/12
Economics Letters Accepted 2 1 1 Good process 2014 01/09/15
Economics Letters Accepted 1 1 1 2012 01/18/13
Economics Letters Accepted 1 N/A 1 Return in 5 weeks with a two-paragraph short response 2014 03/15/14
Economics Letters Accepted 21 N/A 1 2008 12/20/12
Economics Letters Accepted 2 1 1 Serrano seems to be a good/efficient editor. We were asked to collect additional data for our existing experimental treatments to increase our statistical power. We did. Our results didn't change. Serrano accepted the paper a couple of days after resubmission. Very pleasant experience! 2013 11/28/13
Economics Letters Accepted 2 1 1 2014 07/29/14
Economics Letters Accepted 2 N/A 1 2013 08/09/13
Economics Letters Accepted 2 1 1 Good experience. Quick first response with major r&r. Two days between handing in the revision and acceptance. 2012 01/22/14
Economics Letters Accepted 1 1 1 Seems the process is very efficient with the new editorial board 2013 04/20/13
Economics Letters Accepted 8 N/A 1 2008 12/20/12
Economics Letters Accepted 2 1 1 Serrano seems to be a good/efficient editor. We were asked to run additional experimental treatments to support our claims. We did. Our claims were supported. Serrano accepted the paper a week after resubmission without going back to the reviewers. Very quick process! 2013 11/28/13
Economics Letters Accepted 2 1 1 2014 07/29/14
Economics Letters Accepted 2 N/A 0 2009 12/20/12
Economics Letters Accepted 1 1 1 Serrano handled the manuscript. Two lines ref report. Fast and friendly. 2014 01/16/15
Economics Letters Accepted 2 2 0 2012 07/27/14
Economics Letters Accepted 1 1 1 2012 09/30/14
Economics Letters Accepted 3 1 1 2012 12/21/12
Economics Letters Accepted 1 1 1 Fast. Two weeks for R&R. One week to accept. Entire process takes 1 month. 2015 03/05/15
Economics Letters Accepted 3 1 1 Fast response. Good report as well. 2012 02/15/13
Economics Letters Accepted 36 N/A 0 2008 12/20/12
Economics Letters Accepted 10 1 1 2010 09/18/14
Economics Letters Accepted 3 1 0 Fasstest acceptation ever after R&R: 1 day! 2012 01/15/13
Economics Letters Accepted 1 1 1 Good referee report and very efficient editor. Overall- great experience. 2013 03/02/14
Economics Letters Accepted 2 N/A 1 Very quick and efficient. 2014 11/18/14
Economics Letters Accepted 4 N/A 1 2007 12/20/12
Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Referee report useless. Editor not helpful at all. 2014 12/02/14
Economics Letters Ref Reject 16 N/A 1 Terrible single line report from editor (after 16 months of waiting). Pretty sure the editor didn't even read the paper. Would be happy with desk reject, but not with waiting 16 months to read a 5 page article. 2010 10/25/14
Economics Letters Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 2012 07/28/13
Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 2014 05/22/14
Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 Process was a complete disgrace. Editor claims that paper was sent to two referees. But no referee reports were supplied to me. No reason given for rejection, and no indication that the paper was actually read by anyone. Submission fee not refunded. Absolutely pathetic. 2013 05/31/13
Economics Letters Ref Reject 1 N/A 0 Liked the paper, had no qualms with methodology, just felt it wasn't broad enough. 2014 01/16/15
Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 2012 12/20/12
Economics Letters Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 I want my money back ! Fast and uninformative. But at least fast. 2014 02/28/14
Economics Letters Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 2012 12/20/12
Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 The paper was not sent to the referee but instead the editor said it was reviewed by the editorial board. Seems this was not consistent with what is written in website. 2013 07/08/14
Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 Editorial board review and then rejection. They should just ask me $60. 2014 12/05/14
Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 The paper was not sent to the referee but instead the editor said it was reviewed by the editorial board. Seems this was not consistent with what is written in website. 2013 07/08/14
Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Really quick response and decent referee report. The report seemed to be more appropriate for a revise and resubmit. The paper got rejected anyways. 2015 04/03/15
Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Really quick response and decent referee report. The report seemed to be more appropriate for a revise and resubmit. The paper got rejected anyways. 2015 04/03/15
Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 2006 12/20/12
Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 3 1 2013 09/17/14
Economics Letters Ref Reject 0 N/A 1 Fast response, referee did not understand aim of the article, suggested more details on the method, imposible in their space limit. 2013 12/05/13
Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 2 1 At least response in 1.5 month. Report is in reasonable quality. 2014 08/22/14
Economics Letters Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2 weeks 2015 05/26/15
Economics Letters Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 1 week for the desk reject decision 2013 02/09/13
Economics Letters Desk Reject 0 1 0 Andrew Samwick rejected within 2 days, Topic is too speacialized for EL 2014 09/03/14
Economics Letters Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejection after 8 days. According to the editor, the paper has some merit, but is too specialized for EL. He recommended me to send it to a more specialized field journal. At least they are quick! 2015 08/04/15
Economics Letters Desk Reject 5 N/A 0 Couple of comments why the paper does not fit (relatively reasonable). Fairly long wait though. 2014 02/13/15
Economics Letters Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2007 12/20/12
Economics Letters Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2013 12/20/12
Economics Letters Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Baltagi rejected in 4 days, no comments 2012 12/21/12
Economics Letters Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 The contribution of the paper is not enough for EL! 2014 11/25/14
Economics Letters Desk Reject 2 2 1 Referee seemed have little idea about the field or didn't read my 7 page paper. Full of informative/wrong comments. After R&R, the referee required one more round of revision. Desk rejected. 2014 04/29/15
Economics Letters Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject within two days. Results not important enough to a broad audience. 2014 06/27/14
Economics of Education Review Accepted 7 4 2 2012 03/12/13
Economics of Education Review Accepted 1 1 1 Relatively Quick Process. One good quality report suggesting minor revisions after 1 month. After submitting revisions, 1 month until final decision to accept with no other edits. 2015 06/24/15
Economics of Education Review Accepted 6 3 2 2012 12/21/12
Economics of Education Review Ref Reject 4 1 2 First R&R was fair, 2 good ref. reports. Resubmission was a joke, Only one report, completely unfair. Recommended rejection. 2013 12/10/14
Economics of Education Review Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 1 report, minor issues, rejected. not a fair process 2013 12/21/13
Economics of Education Review Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 Only one report, no useful comments 2012 04/29/13
Economics of Education Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 good comments, a nice experience even though the outcome was a rejection. 2013 12/13/13
Economics of Education Review Ref Reject 3 3 1 The reviewer and the editor did not understand the paper. It ended up being published in a higher ranked journal. Will probably not be using this journal again. 2014 05/28/15
Economics of Education Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Economics of Governance Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 Long wait, decision was communicated with a delay of 3 months after reports had been received. One very positive and helpful report, one negative report. Editor decided to reject the paper without any additional comments how he reached the decision. 2013 08/01/14
Economics of Transition Pending 5 N/A 1 2013 08/22/13
Economics of Transition Accepted 5 3 2 2012 09/15/14
Economics of Transition Accepted 4 4 2 2013 06/18/14
Economics of Transition Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2014 12/07/14
Education Economics Accepted 1 1 2 2011 02/13/13
Education Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Quite superficial referee reports. 2013 09/24/13
Education Economics Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 Very slow. Referee reports were very brief and contained little in the way of substantive comments. 2013 02/14/14
Emerging Markets Finance and Trade Accepted 4 3 3 Very professional...the referee reports were fine but rather tough given the quality of the journal 2011 12/13/13
Emerging Markets Finance and Trade Accepted 3 3 2 Great Experience 2012 03/08/14
Emerging Markets Review Accepted 3 2 2 Nice editor 2014 10/25/14
Emerging Markets Review Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 2014 01/22/15
Empirica Ref Reject 9 N/A 2 2012 04/16/13
Empirica Ref Reject 10 N/A 2 Do not send your papers to this journal. It took them 10 months to say anything and at the end even though the referees asked for revisions and were positive the editor rejected the paper. It is definitely not worth the long wait! 2014 06/29/15
Empirical Economics Accepted 6 6 2 long waiting time. one ok, one very short and superficial referee report. the editor was helpful and nice though. 2011 02/18/13
Empirical Economics Accepted 6 3 2 Good reports. 2011 07/30/13
Empirical Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2013 04/12/13
Empirical Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 3 weeks to desk reject paper because it didn't fit the journal. 2012 02/01/13
Empirical Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in 3 weeks. 2013 08/13/13
Energy Economics Accepted 8 2 2 2013 12/27/14
Energy Economics Accepted 4 3 2 good reports. fair process. 2013 06/13/14
Energy Economics Accepted 8 6 1 2011 03/25/13
Energy Economics Ref Reject 4 2 3 Got rejected by the handling and the chief editor after two rounds of revise and resubmit. 2 referees were positive throughout the process, one was an outright acceptance. Overall, the decision was not fair. 2013 09/02/14
Energy Economics Ref Reject 4 2 3 Got rejected by the handling and the chief editor after two rounds of revise and resubmit. 2 referees were positive throughout the process, one was an outright acceptance. Overall, the decision was not fair. 2013 09/02/14
Energy Journal Accepted 4 4 4 Very tedious review process 2010 01/09/13
Energy Journal Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Good comments from 2 referees, the other did not appear to have read the paper well. improved paper based on comments. 2014 06/30/15
Energy Journal Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Very good experience. The referees gave great feedback to improve the paper 2015 06/21/15
Energy Journal Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2013 08/09/13
Energy Policy Pending 10 6 2 2010 01/11/13
Energy Policy Accepted 1 1 2 Got accepted with minor revisions after two wonderful set of comments from the referees. Which editor handles the paper mattered. One of the editors used to reject the paper for no reasons. 2014 09/02/14
Energy Policy Accepted 1 1 2 Got accepted with minor revisions after two wonderful set of comments from the referees. Which editor handles the paper mattered. One of the editors used to reject the paper for no reasons. 2014 09/02/14
Energy Policy Ref Reject 8 3 2 2012 09/13/13
Energy Policy Ref Reject 6 2 2 Totally automated review process; one referee carps even with demonstrably invalid reason and you have no right even to contact the editor. Would not bother again. 2013 10/10/14
Environment, Development, and Sustainability Accepted 3 1 2 Revision accepted for publication in one week. 2014 11/04/14
Environmental and Resource Economics Accepted 4 3 1 2 rounds (1 major R and 1 minor R), one report each time, very fast acceptance after minor R round (less than a month) 2012 10/01/13
Environmental and Resource Economics Accepted 4 5 2 2007 01/09/13
Environmental and Resource Economics Accepted 6 1 2 2011 12/20/12
Environmental and Resource Economics Ref Reject 9 N/A 2 2011 12/20/12
Environmental and Resource Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 One Referee wrote nonsense, the other was good, the editor added nonsense. 2011 02/15/13
Environmental and Resource Economics Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 Useful comments from the editor who had to stand in for the unresponsive second referee. Would submit again. 2014 06/08/15
Environmental and Resource Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 6 weeks to desk reject. 2014 07/29/15
Environmental and Resource Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2013 08/09/13
Environmental and Resource Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Very fast desk reject; 2013 11/25/13
European Economic Review Accepted 3 2 2 3 months to R&R; 2 weeks for second round; 1 week for final acceptance 2012 03/13/13
European Economic Review Accepted 3 2 2 2011 02/06/13
European Economic Review Accepted 3 2 2 Very helpful referee reports. Professional editor. 2013 11/20/14
European Economic Review Accepted 3 3 2 One very useful report from a critical referee, and one mediocre. Tough referee was going through three rounds but eventually accepted. Pretty smooth process, with Eric Leeper being very kind and helpful. 2014 02/02/15
European Economic Review Accepted 3 3 2 Really lucky experience. 2014 02/04/15
European Economic Review Accepted 3 3 3 Very tough but very useful report! Very good experience! 2014 01/29/15
European Economic Review Accepted 1 2 2 Tough, but fair referees. Good comments, helped improve the paper 2013 11/28/13
European Economic Review Accepted 2 1 3 Quick handling, competent (positive) reports 2013 11/28/13
European Economic Review Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Quick response, two spiteful ref reports 2015 06/29/15
European Economic Review Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2012 02/18/13
European Economic Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 01/11/13
European Economic Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 2012 02/04/13
European Economic Review Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 One of the referee reports was sloppy, showing inaccurate reading 2011 07/30/13
European Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Very bad experience. They desk rejected a paper that had been previously accepted for review at much better journals. 2011 01/10/13
European Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Rejected on pretty poor grounds by an associate editor. Maybe paper is not good enough, but the "report" was not convincing either. At least it was fast. 2014 02/02/15
European Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Rejected on grounds of the paper not "establishing a new set of empirical facts that theory must confront" (Eric Leeper). Waste of submission fee. Will avoid in the future. 2014 10/09/14
European Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 In case of desk rejection, they should return the submission fee. 2014 09/08/14
European Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 desk rejection within 1 week. had another paper desk rejected by the same editor two years ago, text motivating the rejection was exactly the same (copy + paste) plus an additional 2 sentences explaining why the editor dislikes the approach chosen in the paper 2014 11/10/14
European Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject in a few hours with very impersonal email. High submission fees. To avoid 2014 09/08/14
European Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 1 Desk rejected in 8 days. My paper had some flaws which I already fixed. Sent my paper to another different journal. 2014 10/29/14
European Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejection after hefty submission fee. Editors only pick those with close network. Avoid at all cost. 2014 08/09/14
European Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2 days desk reject 2014 04/09/14
European Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Quick desk reject with some comments. 2012 03/13/13
European Journal of Industrial Relations Accepted 2 1 2 2012 01/07/13
European Journal of Law and Economics Accepted 12 3 1 2011 04/25/13
European Journal of Law and Economics Accepted 2 1 2 Good experience. Valuable referee's reports. The new editors did a good job 2014 07/25/14
European Journal of Law and Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Efficient despite the adverse outcome. 2014 09/22/14
European Journal of Law and Economics Ref Reject 24 N/A 0 Just a joke, 2 years of "under review" for nothing 2012 05/22/14
European Journal of Political Economy Accepted 3 1 1 2008 01/09/13
European Journal of Political Economy Accepted 10 5 2 Club journal that accepts your paper if you have good ties to the editors. I had. 2012 10/24/13
European Journal of Political Economy Accepted 2 4 3 2010 01/09/13
European Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Fast, but absolutely useless reports. Reviewers did not understand anything. Worst experience I have ever had. Will never submit there again. 2013 09/20/13
European Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 0 N/A 0 useless reports... referees didn't seem to read the paper and appeared not to be experts ..... 2014 09/29/14
European Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Fast. Ref Reports: I'd say one okay, the other so-so. 2014 05/23/14
European Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 Two referees, one useful and helpful, the other clearly not an expert in the field 2013 07/05/15
European Journal of Political Economy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk-rejected in 3 days 2009 01/04/13
European Journal of Political Economy Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Two and a half months for a desk reject for lack of fit. 2013 01/22/14
European Journal of Political Economy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk-rejected in 7 days: "the paper lacks sufficient political economy content to be appropriate" 2014 05/07/14
European Review of Agricultural Economics Accepted 4 6 3 2007 08/02/13
European Review of Agricultural Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 reports: 1 ridiculous, 1 useless, 1 useful 2015 06/08/15
Experimental Economics Accepted 9 1 2 2011 12/21/12
Experimental Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 2011 12/20/12
Experimental Economics Ref Reject 7 N/A 1 Decision based on 1 one-paragraph review that didn't refer to anything specific in the paper. After 7 months of waiting. 2012 07/24/13
Experimental Economics Ref Reject 11 N/A 2 Extensive delay for referee reports apparently due to unresponsive referee 2013 01/26/15
Experimental Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2 weeks. Editor letter saying that what we do is not so new. That's not true. But I'm a nobody. The bar is high for Exp Econ. 2014 10/22/14
Explorations in Economic History Accepted 2 3 2 One excellent referee, one who did not engage at all with their requested revisions, and a very efficient editor. 2013 05/19/14
Explorations in Economic History Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Two good reports plus some comments from editor. very well-run journal 2015 06/23/15
Explorations in Economic History Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 editor read the paper and rejected with some useful comments. fair decision 2012 04/27/13
Financial Analysts Journal Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 The referee reports were received by the ediotr roughly a month before a decision was made. There was supposed to be a third referee report that was not received, which may have been the reason for the time between submission to decision. I ended up presenting the paper at two conferences between the submission and the decision. Between two referee reports and two conference discussions, I have some things to consider for future submission. 2014 06/27/14
Financial History Review?(Cambridge) Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Fair reviews, the editor was helpful. 2014 06/05/15
Financial Management Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 very thorough with helpful suggestions for revision 2014 05/22/14
Fiscal Studies Pending 6 N/A 1 As they claim to be able to give a first response within 8 weeks, I was a bit disappointed to recive it after 6 months. Referee report not particularly useful, but editor had good suggestions 2012 04/16/13
Games and Economic Behavior Pending 14 1 0 Good reports, meaning they liked the paper ;-) , slow first round, fastest second round ever, minor revision requested 2011 01/15/13
Games and Economic Behavior Accepted 5 5 2 2011 12/21/12
Games and Economic Behavior Accepted 5 4 2 One very good report, the other average-to-good. 2007 01/15/13
Games and Economic Behavior Accepted 6 4 2 2011 12/22/12
Games and Economic Behavior Accepted 15 8 2 2009 12/22/12
Games and Economic Behavior Accepted 3 2 2 2010 01/29/13
Games and Economic Behavior Accepted 8 3 2 2011 10/02/13
Games and Economic Behavior Accepted 2 2 1 a short manuscript (8 pages) 2013 11/03/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Very helpful reports. 2015 06/09/15
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 One good referee report. The other without serious suggestions 2013 06/17/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 horrible reports 2012 05/16/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 8 N/A 2 One positive and one negative report. Editor makes no attempt to reconcile conflicting reports or 2013 10/07/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 12 N/A 2 Worst experience so far. Editor forgot to send the paper and took five months to send it to the referees. and then took another seven months. SHAME on you. 2012 05/23/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 8 N/A 2 Helpful reports 2011 04/11/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Outrageously poor process. One referee was extremely favourable, the other's comments were needlessly rude and completely hostile. Second referee based their rejection on a mathematical claim that was completely wrong. The AE finally conceded that I was right and the referee was wrong - but decided to reject the paper anyway! 2012 05/31/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Received two detailed reports, which were reasonably useful. 2014 08/19/14
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 2009 01/09/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 2012 01/02/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 cannot complaint about reports but could have been faster 2012 06/17/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 12 N/A 0 Worst experience ever. Outcome was fair and reports well done, but waiting time was unacceptable and the editor's lettere extremely poor. 2012 04/02/14
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 6 N/A 3 One very helpful referee report, 2 not so helpful 2012 04/13/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 5 N/A 3 2010 01/02/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 Very positive report, editor rejected 2013 10/12/14
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 2011 01/02/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Very good referee reports. 2011 01/10/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 Poor reports 2013 05/07/14
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 7 N/A 3 Seven months... at least the reports where good. 2014 04/30/15
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 2013 12/17/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 2 reports = trash; 1 okay 2011 04/17/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 Bad experience: six months to get one report plus a decision letter that looked like a desk rejection (which is ok, but not after 6 months) 2014 04/30/15
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Good quality report 2012 01/11/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Reports ok-good 2013 10/23/13
Games and Economic Behavior Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Average Quality R-Reports, one missed one has good comments 2012 12/22/12
Games and Economic Behavior Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 The editor rejected the manuscript without any useful comments. All the reasons in the rejection letter are official. Really bad experience! 2015 02/09/15
Games and Economic Behavior Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 no specific reason for rejection 2012 01/18/13
Games and Economic Behavior Desk Reject 3 N/A 3 Low quality reports 2013 10/19/13
Games and Economic Behavior Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2010 01/02/13
Global Finance Journal Accepted 4 1 1 They looked better from outside. Although paper is accepted, i would hardly deal with them in the future 2013 11/21/14
Health Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Terrible editor. Two refereere reports and no comments from the editor on the reports. 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. The editor did not even realized this and rejected. No comments on the reason for rejection was given. My impession was that the editor did not understand the paper the first time (hence no comments the first time) and clearly did not understand the unprofessional behavior of the referees. Editing is a service and it is not mandatory. We do not need dumb editors!! 2011 05/27/13
Health Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 Good report with relevant comments which will be useful if publication of this study is pursued further 2012 03/21/13
Health Economics Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 Basically, just a short e-mail saying that it cannot be accepted and it is more suited to some other types of Journals. The rejection was fine but took too long for a desk reject. 2014 02/04/15
Health Economics Desk Reject 5 N/A 0 It was crazy to wait that long for a dek rejection...was not happy at all...and there was not any comments or any reviews at all...basically waited for nothing for 5 months.. 2012 03/22/13
Health Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Most dishonest rejection. Paper denounced an error on widely cited paper (unfairly comparing bootstrap vs asypmtotic theory with a nonpivot statistic!). The Editor is regular contributor to that mistake and provided non-sensical rejection. In general, you could bulid up a career writting notes on methodological errors publisehd in this journal. 2013 03/13/14
Health Economics Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 Editor at least seemed to have given a pretty detailed reading of the paper, but was disappointed with the amount of time it took for a desk rejection. Comments from editor suggested issues were "fixable" but then basically suggested changing the ID strategy, which basically amounts to writing a whole new paper. So not sure why the editor would say this is "fixable", unless he is trying to say it sucks in a nice way. 2015 04/26/15
Health Economics Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 3 months (!) for a desk reject with quite boring paragraphs from the editor along the lines why this is not using Angrist-Pischke methods... 2014 07/16/15
Industrial and Labor Relations Review Accepted 4 3 1 Supportinve referee report 2011 02/11/15
Industrial and Labor Relations Review Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 Good reports 2013 07/28/13
Industrial and Labor Relations Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 good experience. 2014 07/13/14
Industrial and Labor Relations Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Many thanks to the editor for most constructive comments. He clearly outlined the major flaws and decided to desk-reject it. 2014 02/11/15
Insurance: Mathematics and Economics Accepted 7 1 1 took 7 months for 1 referee report, but the R&R was quick. 2014 10/10/14
Insurance: Mathematics and Economics Accepted 6 N/A 2 2012 10/22/13
Insurance: Mathematics and Economics Accepted 6 2 1 crappy referee. club journal 2013 12/31/14
International Economic Review Accepted 8 6 2 2012 08/02/13
International Economic Review Accepted 6 5 2 2011 12/21/12
International Economic Review Accepted 6 11 2 2009 01/10/13
International Economic Review Accepted 4 4 2 Very good referees. Harold Cole was excellent as editor. 2011 07/31/14
International Economic Review Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 polite and constructive 2012 01/29/13
International Economic Review Ref Reject 6 N/A 3 One positive and two negative reports. All are lengthy and constructive. 2013 11/02/13
International Economic Review Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 they should have desk rejected, AE told me: you should not be surprised that IER typically does not appreciate this kind of work.. they wasted my time 2012 03/28/13
International Economic Review Ref Reject 2 2 2 Referee said there is a mistake in the proof. There was no mistake. 2014 10/12/14
International Economic Review Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2011 12/21/12
International Economic Review Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 2008 01/10/13
International Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 2010 03/14/13
International Economic Review Ref Reject 11 N/A 2 2012 12/28/12
International Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Fast desk reject (1 week from submission). Recommended a field journal 2014 01/25/14
International Journal of Forecasting Ref Reject 11 N/A 2 Referee reports complete crap. One told me I should have use the methodology introduced by XPTO et al, which was the one I used and cited... Only worthy comment was the editors who stated (and rightly so) that though our model statistically improved forecasts. the difference was not economically meaningful. Ok, experience if it wouldnt be for the 11 months. Hence, terrible. 2011 07/28/14
International Journal of Forecasting Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 One report was an absolute travesty and surely had to be disregarded. Other was very thorough and generally favourable. Handling editor still rejects for unclear reasons; very frustrating, but at least fairly timely. 2015 08/01/15
International Journal of Game Theory?(Springer) Accepted 2 1 3 very fast and efficient 2013 06/19/14
International Journal of Game Theory?(Springer) Accepted 2 1 2 wonderful experience 2013 06/23/14
International Journal of Game Theory?(Springer) Ref Reject 36 2 5 Actually, 57 months in total. Several rounds of mildly encouraging R&R reports, then paper was lost. Editor was changed, asked for electronic resubmission and paper got rejected. 2006 02/04/13
International Journal of Game Theory?(Springer) Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 Bad experience, never submit to this journal again. 2014 11/10/14
International Journal of Industrial Organization Pending 0 N/A 0 2013 09/24/13
International Journal of Industrial Organization Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 One very detailed and helpful report ; Second report very short and quite destructive 2014 03/23/15
International Journal of Industrial Organization Ref Reject 2 2 2 . 2014 05/12/14
International Journal of Industrial Organization Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2011 08/02/13
International Journal of Industrial Organization Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 Very poor referee reports. Editor cites two but only sends one. Not submitting again to this journal. 2013 11/01/13
International Journal of Industrial Organization Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 One good report, the other one poor. Good editing process 2013 07/04/13
International Journal of Industrial Organization Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Fast, but very poor quality reports. 2012 02/03/13
International Journal of Industrial Organization Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 AE desk rejected in a week. 2012 01/11/13
International Journal of Manpower Accepted 3 2 2 Smooth process. 2014 01/09/15
International Journal of Manpower Accepted 3 2 2 Good referee reports, very nice editor (Thomas Lange) 2012 12/31/12
International Journal of Manpower Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 good reports 2013 05/19/13
International Labour Review Desk Reject 5 N/A 0 Desk rejected after more than 5 months, avoid 2013 01/14/14
International Review of Law and Economics Accepted 2 2 1 Very quick response. 1 referee with small reasonable suggestions. Though the paper had been to several before so by the time it got to IRLE it was pretty polished. 2014 10/28/14
International Review of Law and Economics Accepted 3 2 2 Excellent Editorial Comments. Fast decision after resubmit. Highly recommended. 2014 05/08/15
International Review of Law and Economics Ref Reject 8 4 2 Rejected after the first R&R. 2010 01/11/13
International Tax and Public Finance Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 The paper was with the journal for five months and we got a rejection with only one referee report with 5 bullet points (two of which were about typos). It is not clear why the referee does not like the paper but it is clear he does not need 5 months for such a report. The comments from the editor are also disappointing: his main suggestion is to send our 7,500 words paper to economics letters. I wonder whether they actually read the document. 2014 11/10/14
International Tax and Public Finance Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Good reports and experience. 2013 08/07/13
International Tax and Public Finance Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2011 04/15/13
IZA Journal of European Labor Studies Accepted 2 1 1 2012 01/08/13
IZA Journal of Labor Economics Accepted 2 1 3 1 useless report, 1 very helpful and 1 okay. 2014 11/11/14
Japan and the World Economy Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Depressing experience. Referee report had two short paragraphs, one of them factually incorrect and demonstrating lack of knowledge of basic facts about Japanese exchange rate movements. 2013 03/05/14
Journal for Labour Market Research Accepted 4 2 2 2008 01/08/13
Journal for Labour Market Research Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Both reports were of high quality 2012 01/08/13
Journal for Labour Market Research Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 01/08/13
Journal of Accounting and Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 the referee report adds nothing, and the editor rejects based on the meaningless report 2013 02/13/13
Journal of Accounting Research Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 good report 2013 02/26/14
Journal of Applied Econometrics Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 2012 01/11/13
Journal of Applied Econometrics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Applied Econometrics Ref Reject 5 N/A 4 Competent referee reports, although one of them extremely hostile. 2013 06/11/13
Journal of Applied Econometrics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2013 10/01/13
Journal of Applied Econometrics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Useless referee reports--one was just a single short paragraph. No input from editor either. 2012 04/30/13
Journal of Applied Econometrics Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 One excellent and detailed (5pages) referee report which helped a lot in revising the paper to a much higher level. Second one was about 15 lines. 2010 04/30/13
Journal of Applied Econometrics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Ok experience. 2 shortish referee reports one fairly positive the other fairly negative, editor decided to reject based on lack of originality. I believe that if that is the reason it could have been desk rejected. Referee reports were on the shrt side, but competent and polite, unfrtunately I doubt that the comments received will help improving the paper. 2014 07/29/14
Journal of Applied Econometrics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejection within five days / Poor allocation of coordinating editor (microeconometrician for a time series paper) 2013 03/27/14
Journal of Applied Econometrics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 "The empirical econometric novelty of the paper is not substantial enough ..." 2014 11/01/14
Journal of Applied Economics Ref Reject 13 N/A 1 After about 1 year of wait, the editor decided to reject the submission on the basis of 1 report (2 referees did not respond) that contained only 2-3 lines that already work was done on the topic (although appreciating the empirical analysis). 2011 12/21/12
Journal of Banking and Finance Accepted 2 2 1 Very short to the point referee report. Surprised at how quickly all went 2012 08/12/14
Journal of Banking and Finance Accepted 1 1 1 Surprisingly quick decision with helpful referee reports. 2012 02/26/13
Journal of Banking and Finance Accepted 3 1 2 Two referees in the first round, good comments. In the second round, the comments are from only one referee, they are easy so revise. 2014 04/26/15
Journal of Banking and Finance Accepted 1 3 1 Short straight-to-the point referee report with a few nice points, no bullc*ap. Very nice experience! 2012 12/17/13
Journal of Banking and Finance Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 This journal provides a lot of details to track your paper (in total, we got 6 change of status), however, the whole process took almost 6 months but the referee reports were ready in less than 2 months (probably because they get paid since submission is USD250). That is, the handling of the submission took almost 4 months, I think this is unacceptable: what is the point to have quick referee reports if the editorial team takes such a long time? The reports were very brief ( 2015 08/04/15
Journal of Banking and Finance Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Not a good referee match given papers subject matter and therefore not very useful comments. 2014 06/25/14
Journal of Banking and Finance Ref Reject 8 N/A 1 1 Report after 8 months, Seemed like all points raised were easily answerable 2012 03/05/13
Journal of Banking and Finance Ref Reject 3 3 2 Good referee reports 2013 02/03/14
Journal of Banking and Finance Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 helpful reports, probably fair 2013 03/19/14
Journal of Banking and Finance Ref Reject 3 1 1 Poor referee. Demanded a lot of work during r&r but reasons for rejection were already known in the first version. 2011 07/04/13
Journal of Banking and Finance Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Banking and Finance Ref Reject 6 N/A 3 Took 6 months to receive 3 reports. One was good and one was particularly bad with a lot of non-english expressions. 2013 04/19/14
Journal of Banking and Finance Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Lowest quality referee reports ever received 2013 02/02/14
Journal of Banking and Finance Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 low quality and very short referee report... 2013 03/25/13
Journal of Banking and Finance Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 2013 01/14/14
Journal of Banking and Finance Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Banking and Finance Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Desk reject after 2 months. No comment from the editor,ridiculous journal. 2014 06/26/14
Journal of Banking and Finance Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Desk reject after t2 2014 06/26/14
Journal of Banking and Finance Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Quick desk reject with a few comments from the editor 2010 08/02/13
Journal of Business and Economic Statistics Accepted 7 9 2 Fair process and good report. Long wait though. 2013 06/05/15
Journal of Business and Economic Statistics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Quick and reasonable. One extremely useful and one useless report. 2013 11/12/13
Journal of Business and Economic Statistics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 10 weeks, one very poor referee report, the other one hostile, but associate editor made a few good comments 2014 03/27/14
Journal of Business and Economic Statistics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 unfair reports 2014 12/22/14
Journal of Business and Economic Statistics Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 2012 02/12/13
Journal of Business and Economic Statistics Desk Reject 1 N/A 1 Desk reject based on a 5 lines initial screening by a ref who was most likely commenting on another paper than the one submitted. 2015 03/08/15
Journal of Common Market Studies Accepted 6 2 4 Helpful editor, fair referees. 2012 09/10/13
Journal of Common Market Studies Accepted 2 1 2 Fantastic journal. Comments very helpful, editors took time to read the paper and were engaged throughout the process. 2014 01/16/15
Journal of Comparative Economics Pending 2 N/A 2 2012 12/28/12
Journal of Comparative Economics Accepted 6 3 2 2006 01/10/13
Journal of Comparative Economics Accepted 4 2 1 Pretty efficient process 2011 02/06/13
Journal of Comparative Economics Accepted 5 5 2 I got two very different referee reports, one was very critical but absolutely low quality. It took me a lot of time to deal with unqualified comments. It took the referees / editor 5 months to look at my revised script to then just accept it without any further comments. A stronger editor could have handled the submission more efficiently also pointing out the weakness of the 2nd report. 2014 10/29/14
Journal of Comparative Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Comparative Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Comparative Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2011 02/02/13
Journal of Comparative Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2011 12/20/12
Journal of Comparative Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Editor provided quick and fair comments why the paper is not suitable for the journal. 2013 12/13/13
Journal of Comparative Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Editor noted that paper of an associate editor was not cited but did not mention the name of the paper. 2012 03/18/13
Journal of Corporate Finance Pending 10 N/A 0 Long waiting for 10 months, send 3 emails to ask, reply: under review 2013 02/26/14
Journal of Corporate Finance Accepted 2 4 1 Very good referee report. Thanks! 2013 01/31/14
Journal of Corporate Finance Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Helpful referee report 2013 03/05/14
Journal of Corporate Finance Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Useful referee report 2013 07/23/13
Journal of Corporate Finance Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 Referee identified some problems of the paper, but her suggestions were incorrect and provided references were not suitable. 2012 03/14/13
Journal of Development Economics Accepted 6 1 3 Useful ref reports and helpful comments from co-editor. Courteous notes from editor&co-editors when first response was delayed. Overall, great experecience! 2012 08/27/13
Journal of Development Economics Accepted 3 3 2 Good experience. Ref reports both frank and helpful. Referees tough & somewhat demanding. Editor guidance also helpful. Basically max 3-month turnaround from their side at any stage. 2013 01/30/14
Journal of Development Economics Accepted 6 1 2 2011 01/02/13
Journal of Development Economics Accepted 4 3 1 2012 03/20/13
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 great reviews and useful comments for ref 2013 04/30/15
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Referee reports were modestly helpful, though there was very little overlap between what the referees commented on. 2012 04/07/13
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 10 N/A 1 Submitted 4 February, rejected 29 December with 1 ok referee report that had been submitted in May. The journal originally sent me the referee's letter to the editor instead of the referee report - took almost a week to actually get the report. 2014 01/21/15
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 9 N/A 2 Long process. 2 months for decision from being notified that "reviews received" and one of the referee reports was dated 7 months ago. moderately helpful but whole process took too long. 2013 11/22/13
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Thoughtful comments from the referees and the editor. 2014 10/22/14
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Excellent reports that really improved the paper. 2013 10/22/14
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 The referees loved it, very positive comments. Then editor Dean Karlan rejected it for fit. Could have desk rejected and saved us all the trouble. 2012 05/18/15
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 9 N/A 2 Good reports but very slow to get a rejection 2012 11/26/13
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 Ok reports with some useful comments 2013 06/11/13
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2011 02/18/13
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 Fair decision. Excellent ref report. Pointed out the problems in the model and also admitted that its difficult to take care of all those problems 2012 07/13/13
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 0 Six months to respond. One referee did read the paper, the other responded with odd arguments. 2015 06/23/15
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 excellent comments from referees 2014 06/29/14
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 No theoretical model was developed. 2014 03/03/15
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 only 1 referee report 3 sentences long by reviewer who did not read the paper 2013 05/18/13
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Excellent and detailed report, fair decision. 2013 01/20/14
Journal of Development Economics Ref Reject 10 N/A 2 rejected after 5 months of 'reviews completed' 2012 03/22/13
Journal of Development Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2014 07/26/14
Journal of Development Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/29/12
Journal of Development Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 No indication that the paper was read. Then again, it only took a couple of weeks to get the rejection. 2011 04/29/14
Journal of Development Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Arbitrary decision without sending it to refs by incompetent editor. 2014 08/09/14
Journal of Development Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Desk rejected after 1 month without any comments 2012 02/18/13
Journal of Development Economics Desk Reject 1 1 0 Editor read/scanned desk rejected paper. Provided very useful comments. Not suited to journal, and turnaround was 2-3 weeks. 2014 06/06/15
Journal of Development Studies Accepted 4 3 2 2014 01/18/15
Journal of Development Studies Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 the issue did not fit... no justifications. 2nd bad experience for me with this journal 2015 03/13/15
Journal of Development Studies Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk Reject after 7 days 2012 06/30/15
Journal of Econometrics Accepted 8 7 2 2 good reports, clearly improved the paper. So slow... 2012 07/02/14
Journal of Econometrics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2012 02/05/13
Journal of Econometrics Ref Reject 10 N/A 3 Helpful comments from referees and editor. But 10 months is too long. 2014 12/02/14
Journal of Econometrics Ref Reject 6 N/A 3 While the paper was rejected the referee reports were in-depth and very helpful. Roughly 2-3 pages of comments from each reviewer. 2011 05/01/13
Journal of Econometrics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2011 12/28/12
Journal of Economic and Social Measurement Accepted 8 N/A 0 Accepted without revisions. Even with the moderately long wait, its hard to complain about that! 2013 03/14/14
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Accepted 4 1 3 2013 02/28/14
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Accepted 4 1 2 Good reports 2012 04/04/13
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Accepted 6 3 2 Very helpful feedback that made this a better paper. 2013 02/28/14
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Accepted 4 3 2 One very good report, the other OK. Efficient handling by editor. 2012 03/18/13
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Accepted 4 3 2 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Ref Reject 8 N/A 3 Good reports. Took way too long... prob will avoid in future 2014 07/31/15
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Good reports 2014 10/21/14
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Ref Reject 8 N/A 0 Very slow... 2012 03/14/13
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Terrible reports. 2015 05/24/15
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Ref Reject 9 N/A 1 bad experience 2012 05/19/13
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Ref Reject 6 N/A 0 1 very good referee reports, 1 mediocre, editor was nice. 2013 04/20/14
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Ref Reject 9 N/A 2 Exceptionally long time 2012 10/12/13
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 Process was acceptable. 2013 08/08/14
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 bad reports but thankfully fast 2012 08/30/13
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Editor response, not a fit to the journal, too theory! Perhaps we can call JABO an experimental journal now. Didn't refund the submission fee. 2014 09/16/14
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 02/06/13
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Pending 1 1 1 Good report and conditionally accepted with minor revisions. 2013 12/06/13
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Accepted 3 1 2 One of the best run journals in macro. Solid referee report and very quick response. 2015 06/15/15
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Accepted 2 1 1 Very very good comments, referee was clearly very knowledgeable. Very tough report on the first RR, extensive changes suggested, though all feasible and mostly all improved the quality of the paper. Editor contributed with some helpful comments as well. Very happy with the process, definetly a favorite for future 2014 07/28/14
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Accepted 3 2 3 Extremely efficient process with good comments by referees. Resulted in much better paper 2013 02/25/15
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Accepted 1 1 1 2 months between submission and final decision! I'm amazed. 2013 12/30/13
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Accepted 3 2 1 Very helpful referee report. Very quick response from Editor (Otrok) after revision. 2013 11/20/14
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Accepted 9 3 2 2011 09/02/13
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Accepted 3 1 2 Excellent reports. Really insightful comments that make the paper a lot better. Fast response from the Editor. JEDC is well run. 2015 05/12/15
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Ref Reject 14 N/A 2 Ridiculous experience. Reports with no use, in one case even mentioning the need of something that was already done in the paper. Unanswered letters to editor by the 6th and 12th months after submission, only got reply after getting in touch to editorial office. 2012 01/16/14
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2012 08/02/13
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 Poor referee report 2012 05/29/14
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Ref Reject 20 N/A 1 2012 09/22/14
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Mildly positive referees but reject nonetheless. Turnaround times are reasonable though. 2015 07/02/15
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject in a few days. Editor clearly read a good deal of the paper and his comments were as helpful as the median referee report. 2014 11/18/14
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2014 07/05/14
Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Otrok rejected within 7 days; considerable comments on the paper, though the three major points are either just wrong or addressed (one of them prominently) in the introduction of the paper. 2014 10/09/14
Journal of Economic Education Pending 0 N/A 0 2012 01/05/13
Journal of Economic Geography Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in less than one month. Fair and useful comment by the editor. Recommended 2015 03/03/15
Journal of Economic Geography Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejection in one week. Editor actually read the paper. Rejected due to lack of signficant contribution, fair assessment. 2015 02/27/15
Journal of Economic Growth Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 one useless ref report 2013 02/10/14
Journal of Economic Growth Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Efficient. Six weeks for response. One useful report, the other poor. 2013 01/18/14
Journal of Economic Growth Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Galor and the referees felt the contribution wasn't substantial enough. I suppose if your work is primarily empirical then you'd better do something that's close to the editor's personal interest, otherwise there will always be the criticism that you need more theory. Would submit again. 2014 10/09/14
Journal of Economic Inequality Accepted 3 4 2 Good reports, smooth process. 2013 04/20/14
Journal of Economic Inequality Accepted 8 1 2 2010 01/06/13
Journal of Economic Surveys Ref Reject 14 N/A 2 2012 12/05/13
Journal of Economic Surveys Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 03/18/14
Journal of Economic Theory Pending 5 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Economic Theory Accepted 6 6 2 2009 12/22/12
Journal of Economic Theory Accepted 4 4 3 Decent reports; AE was a bit difficult, but ultimately helpful 2011 01/29/13
Journal of Economic Theory Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 referee repots good 2012 04/26/13
Journal of Economic Theory Ref Reject 6 N/A 0 "not enough contribution". useless reports. 2014 09/09/14
Journal of Economic Theory Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 Short report 2011 04/04/13
Journal of Economic Theory Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Average quality reports 2012 04/10/13
Journal of Economic Theory Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2013 11/22/13
Journal of Economic Theory Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 2010 01/09/13
Journal of Economic Theory Ref Reject 4 N/A 4 Positive feedback from the editor. But referees are very negative. 2014 07/05/14
Journal of Economic Theory Ref Reject 4 N/A 4 Positive feedback from the editor. But referees are very negative. 2014 07/05/14
Journal of Economic Theory Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Hellwig rejected, suggested 2nd tier journal such as ET 2010 03/05/13
Journal of Economic Theory Ref Reject 10 N/A 2 2010 12/20/12
Journal of Economic Theory Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 Three excellent reports, the referees had really put an effort. I was very grateful despite the rejection. 2014 10/15/14
Journal of Economic Theory Ref Reject 7 N/A 1 2010 12/24/12
Journal of Economic Theory Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 06/03/13
Journal of Economic Theory Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 06/03/13
Journal of Economic Theory Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 editor was nice enough to drop a page or so of precise and useful comments 2013 02/20/14
Journal of Economic Theory (Elsevier) Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 Very good referee report 2013 03/21/14
Journal of Economics Accepted 2 1 2 Fast response; good reports. 2011 02/07/13
Journal of Economics and Management Strategy Accepted 3 8 2 Initial response was quick. Editor and referees seemed willing to listen to reason which encouraged me to work hard on the revision and make my case when I thought reports misguided. 2012 09/09/13
Journal of Economics and Management Strategy Accepted 3 3 2 Good reports that were specific and helpful. Production process is quite efficient, but the journal does not post articles online in advance which harms visibility a little. 2011 05/30/13
Journal of Economics and Management Strategy Accepted 6 5 2 All is well when it ends well. 2013 05/29/14
Journal of Economics and Management Strategy Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 04/12/13
Journal of Economics and Management Strategy Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Empirical Finance Pending 6 N/A 2 referees appear to understand the area. the revision requirements seem achievable. Rather short reports for waiting 6 months. We'll see. 2013 05/22/14
Journal of Empirical Finance Accepted 1 1 1 2013 02/10/14
Journal of Empirical Finance Accepted 6 1 2 Update to previous pending post. The acceptance came quickly after the second round of review. 2013 09/18/14
Journal of Empirical Finance Ref Reject 13 N/A 1 Bad to useless reports after an unacceptably long response time. 2014 03/17/15
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Pending 6 N/A 2 Close call...Editor gave the benefit-of-a-doubt and requested revisions 2013 02/28/14
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Accepted 6 5 2 one good referee, the other not very good, helpful editor 2012 10/22/13
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Accepted 2 3 2 First decision in 2 months. Second decision took 2.5 months. Third round (acceptance) took 2 weeks. 2012 07/07/14
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Accepted 2 3 2 2012 12/04/13
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Accepted 5 4 3 2010 01/09/13
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 relatively fast, but referees totally uninformed of the literature 2014 12/03/14
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 One up, one down...editor decided down. 2011 02/28/14
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2013 02/28/14
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2012 02/20/13
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2011 12/20/12
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2012 08/02/13
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2006 01/09/13
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 07/22/13
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2011 08/02/13
Journal of European Economic History Accepted 3 3 2 One report was very useful and of very good quality, the other was of good quality but not very useful. Very professional way of handling the process 2007 04/16/13
Journal of Evolutionary Economics Accepted 10 3 1 Very helpful report which has permitted to increase the quality of the paper 2012 11/08/13
Journal of Family and Economic Issues Ref Reject 4 2 4 Four reports with huge list of changes -- Editor rejected after R&R because she didn't like the data 2013 07/27/15
Journal of Finance Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 referee report was short, but demonstrated expertise, could have addressed all of the comments but ultimately rejected under KS 2012 05/22/14
Journal of Finance Ref Reject 4 3 2 3 rounds then rejected by editor, paper was improved by addressing reviewers' comments, eventually accepted at RFS 2005 05/22/14
Journal of Finance Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 great referee report, great editor, not so great AE 2013 04/21/13
Journal of Finance Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Referee report kind of useless 2010 01/29/13
Journal of Finance Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2013 03/18/14
Journal of Finance Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 2012 12/27/12
Journal of Finance Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 thorough but not brutal enough - the paper was not very a contribution at all at the time and needed a much harsher rejection, seriously 2012 05/22/14
Journal of Finance Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 KS super smart and constructive feedback. referee and AE comments, OK at best. 2013 08/15/13
Journal of Finance Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Bruno Biais was AE. Got most thorough, informed, and useful referee reports in 5 years. 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Finance Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 referee reports were very thorough and demonstrated expertise, rejections were fair - just wish I would have gotten these reviewers the first time I submitted the paper. I revised as a new submission based on comments from a previous reviewer at the journal 2013 05/22/14
Journal of Finance Ref Reject 8 N/A 1 Cam Harvey gave useless report; obvious outgoing editor is obvious 2011 12/28/12
Journal of Finance Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 KS rejected based on AE's brief report; AE comments somewhat useful but a tad unfair (main criticism applies to many papers publ. in JF in the area) 2013 02/24/14
Journal of Finance Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 5 days. Got the refund soon after request. 2013 12/06/13
Journal of Finance Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 09/21/13
Journal of Finance Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject in 10 days with useless AE comments completely unrelated to the paper. Awful experience given the astronomic submission fee! 2013 02/26/14
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Accepted 1 N/A 1 very comprehensive report. referee is very fast. R&R only takes one week. 2013 11/28/13
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Accepted 2 1 1 Great experience - referee and editor very helpful 2014 05/14/14
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Accepted 1 N/A 1 very comprehensive report. referee is very fast. R&R only takes one week. 2013 11/28/13
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Accepted 2 2 1 Great experience; precise and informed referee report; 1st round for major improvements, 2nd round pretty much converged to acceptance. 2012 02/24/14
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Accepted 3 3 1 1 report each of 2 rounds 2013 08/10/14
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Nice referee report. 2013 07/03/13
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 awful experience. Ref needed 6 months to produce a paragraph of a response. Comments were meant for another paper. Editor didn't even bother to look at it. 2012 02/10/14
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 negative albeit fair referee report 2014 02/24/14
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 repor 2013 06/07/13
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 a 2 paragraph referee report that was not particularly helpful - at least the turnaround time was fast - might as well have been a desk rejection 2013 05/22/14
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Fast response but average comments... I am not sure the referee knows the topic area well enough 2013 09/26/13
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Ref Reject 3 3 1 Rubbish report ! Referee obviously has no clue of what's going on. (s)he asks me to reference a paper I myself wrote when I wa a PhD student but which I did not send anywhere. if we go by his saying, then all finance articles are purely pointless. 2015 06/11/15
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 2015 06/11/15
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk-rejected after ten days. Suggested a general interest journal. 2013 02/09/13
Journal of Financial Econometrics Accepted 12 4 2 4 rounds 2010 12/28/12
Journal of Financial Econometrics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 2011 12/28/12
Journal of Financial Econometrics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 1 month to wait for a desk reject is too long. "We are hesitant to publish purely empirical papers" comment could have been boilerplate but seemed uninformative 2013 05/22/14
Journal of Financial Economics Accepted 4 3 1 relatively fast process and referee helped to improve the papers. might be a once in a career event. 2008 05/22/14
Journal of Financial Economics Accepted 3 2 1 2012 12/22/12
Journal of Financial Economics Accepted 3 N/A 1 2014 05/17/14
Journal of Financial Economics Accepted 3 N/A 1 2014 05/17/14
Journal of Financial Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 An low quality and useless report 2014 12/06/14
Journal of Financial Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 referee report was of little help 2012 12/30/12
Journal of Financial Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 The usual randomness from the JFE 2014 05/25/14
Journal of Financial Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 got the impression that the reviewer did not read the paper and decided to dispute the review, the dispute process took slightly more than 1 month and the new reviewer sided with the old reviewer. also received comments from the old reviewer that were better than the first review. overall satisfied with the dispute process in terms of speed and fairness 2012 05/22/14
Journal of Financial Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 1 day rejection 2013 02/26/14
Journal of Financial Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject in 3 hours, which I found out about from a bullshit list they upload showing the papers sent to referees. The worst experience so far. It was almost like somebody pickpocketed and got my $600 2013 02/26/14
Journal of Financial Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 had to pay $100 instead of the usual submission fee. Deemed too narrow for the journal 2013 05/22/14
Journal of Financial Intermediation Accepted 3 1 2 2012 12/27/12
Journal of Financial Intermediation Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 2013 03/18/14
Journal of Financial Intermediation Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Not very friendly report; referee wants to kill us 2013 10/28/13
Journal of Financial Intermediation Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2011 12/20/12
Journal of Financial Intermediation Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 The quality of the report was disappointing. 2012 03/19/14
Journal of Financial Intermediation Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 editor was helpful in replying to inquiry regarding reason for desk rejection. said it was a matter of fit. paper took over a month to get desk rejected because of problems with elsevier system. journal does not sound like a good fit for my research agenda. topics should probably be closely related to banking 2014 07/14/14
Journal of Financial Intermediation Desk Reject 0 1 0 $ 200 is high for an immediat desk rejection 2014 08/27/14
Journal of Financial Markets Accepted 1 1 1 Near-perfect experience. Extremely helpful comments that significantly improved the paper in the end. Great editor with quick response time too. 2013 08/01/13
Journal of Financial Markets Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 2011 12/28/12
Journal of Financial Markets Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 expert who cited himself, brutal but fair referee report that led to major revision 2013 05/22/14
Journal of Financial Markets Ref Reject 1 1 1 Excellent referee report with excellent suggestions. Fast response and quality report made me satisfied even though I got a fast rejection. 2012 08/02/13
Journal of Financial Research Accepted 3 2 2 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Financial Research Accepted 3 3 2 2012 02/12/13
Journal of Financial Research Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 Good referee report 2013 01/16/14
Journal of Financial Services Research Ref Reject 4 3 3 2011 12/29/12
Journal of Futures Markets Accepted 3 3 1 Good reports, led to significantly better paper 2012 03/19/14
Journal of Happiness Studies Accepted 5 3 2 Long process. Fair editors. 2012 04/29/14
Journal of Health Economics Accepted 7 1 1 Couldn;t get second referee so editor said he read carefully himself. Explains longish time to first review. 2013 05/22/14
Journal of Health Economics Accepted 4 5 2 Total time to acceptance: 13 months 2012 12/30/13
Journal of Health Economics Accepted 4 3 3 Good experience, nice though critical editor, total time to acceptance 10 months 2013 11/13/14
Journal of Health Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 2013 09/24/13
Journal of Health Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 Only one report but good comments. 2014 02/24/15
Journal of Health Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 2013 06/20/13
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in 2 weeks. Editor (frank) did not read the paper and wrote 2 lines arguing that there were many papers addressing similar question (which was not entirely true). No discussion on the ID strategy, nor the novelty of the data. 2014 02/25/15
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2014 03/12/15
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Desk rejected by Nigel Rice after almost 2 months, looking at the reason for rejecting the paper I had the feeling the editor did not read the paper. 2014 12/18/14
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 2012 01/23/13
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 01/10/13
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 09/06/13
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 About 3 weeks turnaround. Comments just so-so. Just didn't seem to believe paper, but without any really good reason. 2013 12/30/13
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Very slow and no much reason given for desk rejection 2013 11/26/13
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 It took almost two month for a desk reject. Such a waste of my valuable time. The editor, Andrew Street, is not even qualified judging from his crap publications. I will never submit to this journal. 2015 03/12/15
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Avoid this journal by any means. The editors are public health monkeys. They know nothing about economics and make stupid comments on my papers. I had much better experience in American Journal of Health Economics. 2015 03/12/15
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Following a previous piece of info: Desk rejected by another editor after almost 2 months, looking at the reason for rejecting the paper I had the feeling the editor did not read the paper. 2014 12/18/14
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject after few days with some useful suggestions. 2013 05/09/13
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Culter said that there was backlog at JHE. 2 months for desk rejection is awkward. 2014 03/13/15
Journal of Health Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Housing Economics Accepted 3 1 2 excellent editor 2013 04/22/14
Journal of Housing Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Thanks for nothing, A. Saiz 2014 03/25/14
Journal of Human Capital Pending 13 N/A 1 . 2011 12/21/12
Journal of Human Capital Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 2011 12/21/12
Journal of Human Resources Pending 4 N/A 2 2008 12/21/12
Journal of Human Resources Accepted 2 3 2 Extremely efficient. Good reports with decent suggestions. 2012 04/17/14
Journal of Human Resources Accepted 3 4 2 This was back when Bill Evans was editor. He gives good comments, but he doesn't mince words. 2009 04/08/13
Journal of Human Resources Accepted 3 1 3 well run journal. RR time was only 2 weeks, no bullshit nitpicking 2013 04/29/13
Journal of Human Resources Accepted 2 N/A 2 Two straightforward reports calling for revision. Accepted 1 1/2 weeks after revision was submitted. No BS, great experience! 2015 08/02/15
Journal of Human Resources Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Awesome experience. Both referees really spent time on the paper and gave lots of suggestions.So did the editor. 2014 08/17/14
Journal of Human Resources Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2011 12/21/12
Journal of Human Resources Ref Reject 3 N/A 0 One positive report, one negative, editor's reject decision. Negative report is pretty bad. Some useful comments, most misreads and poor understanding of model. 2014 02/26/15
Journal of Human Resources Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 solid referee reports, fair editor 2013 05/29/13
Journal of Human Resources Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2011 12/21/12
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 your paper, after some updating to reflect the recent complementary literature, would be more appropriate for a more specialized journal 2015 06/09/15
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 The editor said that enjoyed the paper very much but the contributon is not sufficiently broad for a general interest journal as JHR and fits better into a labour journal. Very fast. I didn't know that JHR is a general interest journal! 2015 05/06/15
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 0 N/A 1 2011 01/02/13
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 not broad enough, it seems that JHR considers themselves as a general interest journal. 2014 06/19/14
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Devreaux desk reject. No comments. 2014 04/09/14
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Editor finds it interesting but not enough for a "general journal". Suggests a field journal. Fast and fair enough. 2014 02/08/15
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/31/12
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/22/12
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Editor finds it interesting but not enough for a "general journal". Suggests a field journal. Fast and fair enough. 2014 02/08/15
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desh rejected in less than a week. Great comments from editor. 2013 04/23/13
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 very sad 2013 02/20/13
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Human Resources Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject within a few days. Apparently JHE considers itself general interest. No comments, but very fast. 2013 03/17/14
Journal of Industrial Economics Accepted 3 2 0 3 months to R&R, accepted after 1 round of revision. R&R was helpful. 2012 02/28/13
Journal of Industrial Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 2011 01/29/13
Journal of Industrial Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 weird referee, probably a grad student 2012 02/27/13
Journal of Industrial Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 awful report...referee asked "why is this a problem?" 2012 03/06/13
Journal of Industrial Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2012 02/15/13
Journal of Industrial Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2011 08/02/13
Journal of Industrial Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 To be honest, I had a hard time understanding exactly what the point of your paper is. As best I can tell, the purpose is to use a particular modeling framework to illustrate that a trade policies defined in terms of 'import-export' quotas cannot yield a Nash equilibrium of the trade game. In any case, the paper is not a good match for the JIE, both because it is highly technical and (more importantly) because it is more of a trade theory paper than an IO paper. 2014 08/22/14
Journal of Industrial Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Very inefficient desk! 2012 06/03/13
Journal of Industrial Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/29/13
Journal of Industry, Competition, and Trade Accepted 3 4 1 2014 04/27/15
Journal of Industry, Competition, and Trade Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Referee just pointed put 2012 01/04/13
Journal of Industry, Competition, and Trade Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 05/03/13
Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Ok referee reports. Editor was a bit harsh. 2014 01/29/15
Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 14 N/A 0 2014 05/19/15
Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Very good reports even though the paper was rejected. 2013 04/17/14
Journal of Institutional Economics Accepted 2 2 2 Split reports but very clear advice from editor. Quick turnaround upon revision. 2013 01/29/15
Journal of Institutional Economics Accepted 2 2 2 Very efficient process. 1 short report (but good points) and 1 very long report. After the second round R&R, I only had to deal with the long reviewer. Overall good experience. 2013 01/28/15
Journal of Institutional Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2012 01/18/13
Journal of International Development Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Very slow and the reason for rejection was not good enough. 2015 03/20/15
Journal of International Development Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 editor said the paper had too much economics 2012 04/27/13
Journal of International Economics Accepted 3 1 2 Good experience. Editor (Taylor) gave additional advice. We tried to do everything we were asked to and also had a major overhaul of the data. Outright accept after first resubmission still came as a surprise given JIE typically has 2-3 rounds. 2014 05/03/15
Journal of International Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2015 05/07/15
Journal of International Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 reports are helpful 2011 01/19/13
Journal of International Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2010 08/02/13
Journal of International Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 He suspects he could not understand a yota. Now? it ?could ?be ?the ?case ?that ?I ?have? completely ?misread? the? paper.? If? so,? I? apologize.? In? my ?defense,? however,? the? writing? is ?so ?poor? that ?no? one ?could ?understand? it.?I? would? recommend ?that? the ?author? re?write ?the ?paper ?with ?the ?help ?of ?some one? fluent ?in? English. This? is ?quite ?perplexing, ?since ?the ?Nash ?axioms ?apply ?to? the ?Nash? bargaining? solution? of? a? cooperative? game (can anyone confirm this?)? . 2009 04/30/14
Journal of International Economics Ref Reject 10 N/A 2 2013 06/01/14
Journal of International Economics Ref Reject 8 N/A 2 2014 01/22/15
Journal of International Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 ref report was ok 2011 01/19/13
Journal of International Economics Desk Reject 5 N/A 0 took the money. took 5 months. desk rejected. no comments given. totally useless editor. 2013 02/12/14
Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money Desk Reject 4 N/A 0 Desk reject from editor after 4 months 2014 02/02/15
Journal of International Money and Finance Accepted 12 8 2 very, very slow 2009 01/10/13
Journal of International Money and Finance Accepted 2 2 1 Very clear referee report with constructive comments. Also revisions handled quite efficiently! 2013 10/29/14
Journal of International Money and Finance Accepted 11 3 1 2011 09/10/13
Journal of International Money and Finance Ref Reject 7 N/A 1 Horrible experience. Over half a year for response from one referee who a) had no problems with the methodology, b) liked the writing, and c) thought it had a novel contribution. Recommended reject because he thought the sample of countries wasn't broad enough (despite it being a paper on a specific set of countries on purpose, as explained in the methodology). One paragraph that dismissed four years of work. Editor then agreed. Will never submit here again. 2014 01/16/15
Journal of International Money and Finance Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 1 report suggesting to cite the Editor's work and speaking about things outside of the scope of the paper. Editor rejected without comments. Sad experience not for the first time with this journal. 2013 01/16/14
Journal of International Money and Finance Ref Reject 10 N/A 2 Bad experience, there was a long wait of mroe than 10 months to get 2 referee reports that did not like the the paper (but not so sure why). Each report was less than 600 words long with 3-4 main comments but not in much dept (not even full references included). To get rejected in a good journal, that is ok since it is part of the business but waiting 10 moths for refereee reports of that quality was a really bad deal. 2013 08/28/14
Journal of International Money and Finance Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 Useful report 2013 09/22/13
Journal of International Money and Finance Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 2012 01/19/13
Journal of International Money and Finance Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 1 report ok, the other one awful, Referee clearly did not understand the paper. Editor skimmed it at best and decided to reject without comments. Bad experience. 2013 11/19/13
Journal of International Money and Finance Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Ridicolous report: 3 lines where the referee asked to address "geopolitical" issues 2011 01/09/13
Journal of International Money and Finance Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Associate editor rejected on poor grounds. At least the process was fast. 2014 02/02/15
Journal of International Trade and Economic Development Accepted 6 2 2 Giles in a nice editor 2013 10/25/14
Journal of International Trade and Economic Development Accepted 4 2 2 Good experience. Two short referee reports straight to the point. 2014 06/15/15
Journal of International Trade and Economic Development Ref Reject 0 N/A 0 Unfortunately the paper is rejected but I hope the reports help you improve the paper for another journal. 2007 04/23/14
Journal of Labor Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 One very low quality report, one very thorough report. The letter from the editor suggests that he/she did not have a firm grasp of the paper. 2013 07/01/14
Journal of Labor Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 3 2012 12/30/12
Journal of Labor Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 One good, one bad referee report. 2014 06/30/14
Journal of Labor Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Labor Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject within few days 2015 04/07/15
Journal of Labor Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 01/11/13
Journal of Labor Research Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2012 01/07/13
Journal of Labor Research Desk Reject 4 N/A 0 2014 06/03/14
Journal of Law and Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 12/21/12
Journal of Law and Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 On its face, the referee provided a good report, but once I dug into the details, it was clear he didn't understand my identification strategy. My fault for not discussing that up front. 2013 07/17/14
Journal of Law and Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 2013 02/28/14
Journal of Law and Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 2012 02/15/13
Journal of Law and Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 One single bad report. A lot of small nit-picky criticism and some factually wrong statements about paper. 2014 07/08/14
Journal of Law and Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject in less than 24 hours 2014 09/30/14
Journal of Law and Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Fast turnaround. Desk rejected due to model optimizing how much I porked your mom. 2013 01/12/14
Journal of Law and Economics Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 desk reject after three months... editor claimed they did not publish papers on this topic but they bogh b 2011 12/24/12
Journal of Law and Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2009 01/11/13
Journal of Macroeconomics Accepted 4 4 1 2014 06/30/15
Journal of Macroeconomics Accepted 2 1 1 Excellent review with great advice on how to improve the paper. Very quick and professional editing. Great experience! 2012 11/19/13
Journal of Macroeconomics Accepted 6 1 1 2014 02/25/15
Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 6 N/A 0 Very bad referee reports 2012 01/14/14
Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Reject. Report very critical but useful nonetheless. 2014 12/24/14
Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Fair enough. 2013 10/26/13
Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 9 N/A 2 Incredible experience: one of the referee report told us that a working paper was published on almost the same subject (and justifies our rejection)... but this working paper was published 5 months after our submission ! 2012 10/24/13
Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 9 N/A 1 This is the letter I sent to the editor of JME: 2013 05/28/14
Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Two ref reports in 8 days. It seems they rushed to reject it. Reports are not great. 2014 07/24/14
Journal of Mathematical Economics Accepted 3 1 1 Referee really helped me to improve this paper with a great report. Editor didn't waste any time on accepting after first revision. 2011 03/01/13
Journal of Mathematical Economics Accepted 4 2 2 2010 11/17/13
Journal of Mathematical Economics Ref Reject 3 3 3 Very useful referee reports. 2014 07/27/14
Journal of Monetary Economics Pending 0 N/A 0 Reviews were completed soon but the editors did not send them to me, nor did they respond to queries. I withdrew the paper. Submission is waste of time. 2014 03/10/15
Journal of Monetary Economics Pending 0 N/A 0 Reviews were completed soon but the editors did not send them to me, nor did they respond to queries. I withdrew the paper. Submission is waste of time. 2014 03/10/15
Journal of Monetary Economics Pending 22 N/A 0 2011 01/22/13
Journal of Monetary Economics Pending 0 N/A 0 Emailed journal to withdraw submission after 14 months. Heard nothing and received no replies to my emails 2012 06/10/13
Journal of Monetary Economics Pending 8 N/A 0 Reports submitted within one month. Going into the ninth month with no response. When do I give up? 2014 03/11/15
Journal of Monetary Economics Accepted 18 3 1 It takes the editor a long time to respond but the comments are very helpful. It is a very demanding R&R and we revise the paper a lot according to the suggestions, but it is worthwhile. Not only is it accepted, but it also becomes a much better paper now. 2012 07/18/15
Journal of Monetary Economics Accepted 11 5 1 2012 06/21/14
Journal of Monetary Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 2012 05/29/14
Journal of Monetary Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 Actually, not as bad as many people think.Reports by referee and AE were of little help (they raised a few valid points), but this can happen at any other journal too. 2012 04/07/13
Journal of Monetary Economics Ref Reject 9 N/A 0 2011 03/13/13
Journal of Monetary Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 2011 12/21/12
Journal of Monetary Economics Ref Reject 36 10 1 2008 12/20/12
Journal of Monetary Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Relatively quickly/decent referee report 2013 01/22/15
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Accepted 6 5 3 Very good referee reports. 2011 04/06/13
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Accepted 3 4 2 Very constructive comments from Editor (Pok-Sang LAM) and referees. Improved the paper significantly. 2013 03/22/15
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Accepted 3 5 2 Very constructive comments from Editor (Pok-Sang LAM) and referees. Improved the paper significantly. 2012 02/01/15
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Accepted 11 3 2 2011 01/04/13
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Ref Reject 3 N/A 0 2 referee reports: 1 so-so and 1 extremely shitty. The shitty one referred to multiple papers in very low ranked journals authored by the same set of authors. Upon inspection these papers are only superficially related. Maybe the paper did not merit publication in JMCB but that referee report was really ridiculous. 2014 10/03/14
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 1 constructive report; 1 useless report 2011 05/29/14
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 One referee report was very detailed. The other report also helped in improving the paper. 2014 01/24/15
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Ref Reject 7 N/A 1 2013 03/18/14
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Ref Reject 8 N/A 2 A bit slow, but kindly acknowledged by the editor. One very good and helpful report. 2011 03/08/13
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Referee seemed have read just the abstract. And he did not find the topic interesting. 2014 04/29/15
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Very efficient editorial process by Ken West. One very good report, another one heavily biased against methodology, yet helpful. 2011 03/08/13
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Ken West was the editor 2014 09/07/14
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 2011 12/22/12
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2011 01/12/13
Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Very fast reject and they sent my check back 2010 08/02/13
Journal of Pension Economics and Finance Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Bad experience. The editor failed to find reviewers and decided to reject it after 10 weeks with no good reason 2015 03/27/15
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject in two days due to relevance 2014 12/12/14
Journal of Policy Modeling Pending 2 12 0 R&R in two months. Submitted the revision, and they NEVER got back to me. They ignored all my emails and I had to pull out after more than a year. 2012 06/21/14
Journal of Policy Modeling Accepted 10 11 0 The editor talked about 4 ref reports. We saw none. Will never try it again. 2012 05/08/15
Journal of Policy Modeling Accepted 12 12 0 It took 18 months after first revision. Worst experience 2012 05/07/15
Journal of Political Economy Pending 20 N/A 0 Repeated enquiries ("hey, it´s been a year now") have been followed by profuse apologies. Currently 20 months of waiting after first submission. No reply yet. But we are still hopeful. 2011 01/06/13
Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 18 N/A 2 One of the referee reports was of alarmingly low quality. 2010 01/07/13
Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 13 N/A 3 2011 12/20/12
Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 6 N/A 3 no longer a serious all purpose journal imho; "desk reject" after 6 mos on the basis of style in the abstract 2009 01/12/13
Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Heckman handled paper. Faster than I expected given horror stories i have heard here and elsewhere, and with good comments from refs and editor. 2013 05/31/13
Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 10 N/A 2 One very very positive ref report, the other one was short and against, the editor gave us many comments but rejected at the end 2013 05/28/14
Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 5 N/A 3 Editor: Heckman; high quality reports, two of the reports were helpful and constructive 2014 12/05/14
Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Seemed a decent process to me 2009 01/29/13
Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 3 N/A 4 2013 12/06/13
Journal of Political Economy Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 Three reports, all of high quality, within 2 months. Very constructive and useful for revisions. They took the paper seriously. 2014 07/17/14
Journal of Political Economy Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2013 11/01/13
Journal of Political Economy Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 3 months for a desk rejection - no need to comment... 2012 01/07/13
Journal of Political Economy Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 2010 12/20/12
Journal of Political Economy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Despite perceptions they do desk reject. Editor looked at it as did a colleague of the editor. Told not a fit. 2013 10/23/13
Journal of Political Economy Desk Reject 8 N/A 0 8 month desk reject with no reports--JPE is dead to me 2014 02/16/15
Journal of Population Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 Two excellent (and supportive) referee reports. Editor reject due to relevance 2013 01/18/14
Journal of Population Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2009 01/07/13
Journal of Post Keynesian Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 0 Incredibly insulting rejection that made it clear the referee had not read past the first 2 pages of the paper. Due to a "typographical error" in sending me an email, I had to wait an extra month (and after I emailed asking for a status update) to learn of the rejection - wasting time I could have spent submitting it to another journal. 2013 10/05/13
Journal of Post Keynesian Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 Nice communication with the Editor, but the referre report was terse with only one and brief idea. 2013 01/29/14
Journal of Productivity Analysis Pending 6 N/A 3 2012 02/15/13
Journal of Productivity Analysis Accepted 8 6 2 2013 06/14/15
Journal of Public Economic Theory Pending 0 N/A 0 Submitted in April, still waiting 2012 01/08/13
Journal of Public Economic Theory Pending 0 N/A 0 2012 02/10/13
Journal of Public Economic Theory Accepted 5 5 2 2006 08/02/13
Journal of Public Economic Theory Ref Reject 5 N/A 0 1 good referee, 1 weird referee 2012 07/15/13
Journal of Public Economic Theory Ref Reject 11 N/A 0 Terrible experience overall. 2012 04/27/14
Journal of Public Economic Theory Ref Reject 9 N/A 1 Terrible experience. 2014 03/21/15
Journal of Public Economic Theory Desk Reject 5 N/A 0 5 months for a desk reject! I don't know what to add. 2014 09/28/14
Journal of Public Economics Accepted 4 4 2 2013 11/10/13
Journal of Public Economics Accepted 3 3 2 Very Detailed construtive reports. Short turn around time. 2014 03/30/15
Journal of Public Economics Accepted 3 1 2 Good referee reports. Jim Andreoni was an excellent editor. He saw we addressed the points, and accepted the paper himself without going back to reviewers although comments were substantial. 2012 11/28/13
Journal of Public Economics Accepted 6 2 2 2013 11/18/14
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 bad experience... close call, got rejected... 2013 06/12/13
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 9 N/A 2 Good editor, reports ok 2012 01/31/13
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 3 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2011 01/03/13
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2009 01/04/13
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 One bad/objectively false report, one useful report 2011 04/04/13
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Both referee reports of decent quality. 2013 02/13/14
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 Two OK reports. 2013 07/31/13
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Two reports negative and one positive, editor chooses to reject. 2014 06/03/14
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 One report was low quality the other was so-so. Not a particularly good experience 2014 04/29/15
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Decent reports, rejecting for fair reasons. Pretty well run, can't complain. 2015 07/23/15
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Polite, even quite positive reports. Nothing that could not be fixed in 2 days, still reject. Seems like being rejected in virtue of the magnificence of the journal 2014 12/01/14
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 2012 01/29/13
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 8 7 2 It is ridiculous how much time the referees take to submit their reports. 2012 06/16/13
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2011 01/01/13
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2013 09/11/13
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 One useful report, one useless 2013 04/09/14
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 Completely useless reports from referees/editor not know the methodology involved. Paper eventually got accepted at higher ranked journal (!). 2011 07/31/14
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2011 12/22/12
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Two entirely reasonable reports. Both have suggestions (one extensive, one less so). 2014 06/16/14
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 "I acknowledge the contribution, but I don't like it". 2013 09/20/13
Journal of Public Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2011 01/03/13
Journal of Public Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2014 09/30/14
Journal of Public Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 06/03/13
Journal of Public Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Public Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2010 12/20/12
Journal of Public Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2010 01/09/13
Journal of Public Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Journal of Public Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Very helpful and polite rejection 2013 02/13/13
Journal of Public Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2010 04/15/13
Journal of Public Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 fast 2013 01/08/14
Journal of Public Policy Pending 0 N/A 0 the comment above was for another journals. Mod's pls delete it. 2014 09/12/14
Journal of Public Policy Pending 0 N/A 0 submitted half a year ago. editorial team do not respond to email. had to withdraw 2014 09/12/14
Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 There is only one report called review number 2! The referee suggested a wrong point as the problem but didn't suggest rejection. Editor rejected based on that. Complete waste of time!! 2014 04/02/15
Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 Terrible report. Never submit to this journal again. 2014 04/02/15
Journal of Real Estate Research Accepted 3 3 3 2011 12/23/12
Journal of Real Estate Research Accepted 3 2 4 Two referee reports were really good. Pleasantly surprised by the quality of referee report. 2012 04/22/14
Journal of Regulatory Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2010 08/02/13
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 2012 12/27/12
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 2012 01/21/13
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 I was politely told that I should have cited more JRU papers. The paper was a very good fit though. 2014 10/01/14
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty Desk Reject 4 N/A 0 Brief, ignorant, editor's letter. After 3 weeks this would have been acceptable. 2014 09/02/14
Journal of Sports Economics Accepted 1 1 2 Great experience. 2 reports and 2 rounds. Only had to face one reviewer in the second round. Very efficient. 2015 06/23/15
Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy Desk Reject 7 N/A 0 After careful consideration, the JAPE editorial team considers the paper is largely a statistics exercise. On this basis the paper is unsuitable for JAPE and the decision is to reject the paper. 2014 05/02/15
Journal of the European Economic Association Accepted 3 3 3 Awesome experience. Very helpful comments and suggestions from three reviewers and editor (Angeletos). 2013 11/20/14
Journal of the European Economic Association Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 Extremely fast and with 2 high quality RRs. 2014 03/03/15
Journal of the European Economic Association Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Very quick. Very good editor recommending a field journal. One good ref report, the other apparently did not read the paper. 2013 10/06/13
Journal of the European Economic Association Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Very quick response. One report was very useful. The editor also read the paper and gave very good comments and suggestions. Great experience in general! 2015 06/30/15
Journal of the European Economic Association Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Quick response. Very helpful referee reports. 2015 06/02/15
Journal of the European Economic Association Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Very efficient editorial process, excellent reports. 2011 03/08/13
Journal of the European Economic Association Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 OK reports, not very deep. 2014 05/21/14
Journal of the European Economic Association Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2014 04/25/14
Journal of the European Economic Association Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 6 weeks. 2 strong reports with valid empirical critiques, 1 less so. 2014 04/18/14
Journal of the European Economic Association Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Quick (2 weeks) desk reject 2011 04/04/13
Journal of the European Economic Association Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 07/28/13
Journal of the European Economic Association Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 within 2 days, nice mail by the editor 2013 12/20/13
Journal of the European Economic Association Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Three weeks for a desk reject. Some reasons given. 2013 01/22/14
Journal of the European Economic Association Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Quick desk rejection (1 week) 2013 05/31/13
Journal of the European Economic Association Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Quick rejection (Canova, 5 days), professional, very acceptable decision. Also suggested 3 very good field Journal. 2013 08/16/13
Journal of the European Economic Association Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject without a single comment 2015 02/04/15
Journal of the European Economic Association Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2011 12/31/12
Journal of the European Economic Association Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 06/03/13
Journal of Transport Economics and Policy Accepted 4 1 1 Good and efficient process 2014 06/18/15
Journal of Transport Economics and Policy Ref Reject 10 N/A 2 2008 12/21/12
Journal of Urban Economics Accepted 3 3 2 good reports, fast journal 2011 01/01/13
Journal of Urban Economics Accepted 0 N/A 0 I am asked to send to another journal because the paper is not a good fit 2014 06/19/14
Journal of Urban Economics Accepted 3 2 2 the editor is very nice, professional and efficient 2010 01/19/13
Journal of Urban Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Fast response time. Editor was great (helpful, insightful, truthful). Two referee reports: 1 seemed to miss basics of the paper and didn't provide useful insight/comments and the other was exhaustive, insightful, and useful moving forward. Reason for rejection was editor thought paper belonged in `less selective' journal. 2013 07/18/13
Journal of Urban Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 The referee reports were serious and offered some good suggestions, although one of the referees appeared not to understand the theoretical model used in the paper. Neither felt that the paper was a good fit for an urban journal. 2013 08/29/13
Journal of Urban Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2013 12/16/13
Journal of Urban Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Nitpicky reviews. 2014 02/23/15
Journal of Urban Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Reports were not fair but at least fast response. 2014 10/23/14
Journal of Urban Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 reports show referees were serious. Sadly, no mention of why paper was rejected (only minor issues raised). Comments were helpful. 2011 01/15/13
Journal of Urban Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Editor was very nice, one of the referees completely misunderstood my paper and barely commented on it. The other referee was serious however. 2012 12/24/12
Journal of Urban Economics Ref Reject 3 3 2 Referees on the fence, rejection because editor does not like topic 2013 06/06/14
Journal of Urban Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2013 06/13/14
Journal of Urban Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Editor desk rejected in 24 hours. 2011 01/25/13
Journal of Urban Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 rejected by editor, saying should submit to other similar journal 2013 07/07/13
Journal of Urban Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 recommend other journal 2013 01/28/14
Kyklos Ref Reject 1 N/A 0 2011 12/20/12
Kyklos Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Editor referred to a report by a reviewer received by phone 2011 01/07/13
Kyklos Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Editors reject the paper. The decision is motivated by acceptable reasons and suggest potential alternative journals. 2013 01/17/14
Labour Economics Accepted 6 8 2 Editor Ian Walker gave us a fantastic referee report. The two anonymous referees were surely competent even though they did not go in depth as the editor did. 1 R&R round. Re-submission took a week to be finally be accepted. Very good experience. 2012 09/21/13
Labour Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Ref rejected, 1 decent report (2 pages) and 1 pretty bad report (3 lines) 2013 01/14/14
Labour Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 01/11/13
Labour Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 one positive, one negative report. a positive experience, all in all. 2012 06/04/13
Labour Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 2 decent reports. Way too slow though. My paper was not complicated and could have been rejected in 2-3 months easily. 2014 03/30/15
Labour Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Very good referee reports. Also the editor gave us good comments. 2010 04/16/13
Labour Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 A very similar paper came out a month after our paper got rejected, new paper's authors are closely tied to this journal. 2012 12/20/12
Labour Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 One accept with min comments, one said ok but many points/revisions, one reject, editor said too large a revision without guarantee for accept 2012 03/07/13
Labour Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 2 months for desk rejection. Urghh. 2014 09/29/14
Land Economics Accepted 4 3 2 two reports, comments not always very clear on what was wanted but still helpful. I will submit again 2013 03/13/15
Land Economics Accepted 3 N/A 2 Second round took 30 minutes, from submission to acceptance. Then took about 14 months to be come out in print. 2010 12/21/12
Macroeconomic Dynamics (Washington) Accepted 8 3 2 2010 12/22/12
Macroeconomic Dynamics (Washington) Accepted 3 3 2 One of my best experiences. Referee reports are interesting and constructive. They clearly help the author to improve their paper instead of rejecting it without trying to extract the best. Highly recommended. 2014 06/13/15
Macroeconomic Dynamics (Washington) Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 2 OK reports. At least they're quick 2012 03/14/13
Macroeconomics Dynamics (Cambridge) Accepted 7 3 2 Two rounds of R&R. One referee report excellent. Second report little use. R&R process used the good referee who gave two further good reports - process 14 months total but useful. 2011 01/18/14
Macroeconomics Dynamics (Cambridge) Accepted 6 4 2 Very good referee and associate editor report 2012 09/25/13
Macroeconomics Dynamics (Cambridge) Accepted 12 7 0 Unreasonably slow. 2012 02/25/15
Macroeconomics Dynamics (Cambridge) Accepted 5 3 2 A very pleasant experience after 5 rounds of really bad reviews. William A. Barnett is a very professional editor and reviews were helpful. The paper was accepted after I incorporated all suggestions in R&R. Will definitely send again. 2010 07/16/15
Macroeconomics Dynamics (Cambridge) Ref Reject 4 2 2 Bad reports (full of mistakes, pointed out to AE but didn't work) 2011 01/04/13
Macroeconomics Dynamics (Cambridge) Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Referee reports not particularly useful 2013 01/14/14
Macroeconomics Dynamics (Cambridge) Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Quite fast luckily. One referee was in favour of a strong R&R, the other recommended rejection on the basis of mathematical error, the AD seconded the latter. Needless to say, the error is not as such, 2013 01/09/14
Macroeconomics Dynamics (Cambridge) Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 01/17/13
Macroeconomics Dynamics (Cambridge) Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in 20 days 2014 11/20/14
Management Science Accepted 2 1 2 Quick 2013 05/15/13
Management Science Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Good report. 2012 02/08/13
Management Science Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Finance section. Barber was AE. 2011 12/28/12
Management Science Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 2012 02/06/13
Management Science Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Not a good fit! Although the paper fits to one of their categories. 2015 06/08/15
Management Science Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Reasonable motivations for desk rejection provided 2015 04/30/15
Managerial and Decision Economics Accepted 2 1 2 One very good set of comments. The other `meh'. Good experience. 2014 07/03/14
Managerial and Decision Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 The most idiotic referees I've ever seen. I guess I had the luck of being assigned to two business school types with absolutely no idea of the literature that my model belonged to. One stupid comment after another, tons of irrelevant references requested, and a complete lack on understanding of the model. Particularly, one of the referees seemed like he didn't read a single word past the intro. This journal still has the word economics in its tile, please stop asking clueless marketing types to referee! 2015 07/11/15
Marketing Science Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 Slow. Was not notified by the decision through email, found the decision in manuscript central during a random check. 2014 07/12/14
Marketing Science Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2014 11/07/14
Marketing Science Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 48hr desk rejection with a weird comment from the editor; You did not address related marketing literature! The literature review was complete! 2015 06/02/15
Mathematical Social Sciences Accepted 3 2 1 2012 01/10/13
Mathematical Social Sciences Accepted 6 2 2 2012 06/24/13
Mathematical Social Sciences Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 Waste of time! never submit here again. 2014 05/25/15
North American Journal of Economics and Finance Accepted 3 2 2 extensive and helpful ref. report 2013 03/08/14
Open Economies Review Pending 3 N/A 2 Two referee reports, one engaged and constructive, the other written in incredibly poor English that took issue with some phrases I used. Interesting use of a referee's time. 2014 01/16/15
Open Economies Review Accepted 3 2 2 2013 10/22/13
Open Economies Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Reports seemed to be of pretty good quality. 2014 03/27/15
Open Economies Review Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 Desk reject after 3 month. Too long 2011 11/08/13
Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics Accepted 6 3 2 There was a second round of ref. reports, the reports were all nice an constructive 2012 02/20/13
Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 10 N/A 1 2009 12/20/12
Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Ref reports of high quality, mention half a dozen suggestions for robustness which perhaps amounted to too much for the editor to let this go to revision. One of those cases where the paper though rejected improved significantly as a result. 2014 10/09/14
Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 1 paragraph of superficial non-descriptive comments from each ref 2012 05/01/13
Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 Desk rejection after three months, editor apologized for delay 2014 10/13/14
Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 2013 12/20/12
Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 2014 09/17/14
Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2014 03/18/14
Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 2 month for a desk rejection 2013 01/14/14
Oxford Economic Papers Pending 5 N/A 2 helpful comments 2013 02/10/14
Oxford Economic Papers Accepted 5 4 2 2013 09/23/14
Oxford Economic Papers Ref Reject 6 N/A 0 Poor referee reports 2013 01/14/14
Oxford Economic Papers Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 Very disappointing experience. Waited 6 months for one report, from which it was clear that the referee hadn't even read the paper properly. Waste of time. 2014 06/02/15
Oxford Economic Papers Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Decent referee reports. Quick turnaround. Will submit again.. 2014 01/24/15
Oxford Economic Papers Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 2011 12/20/12
Oxford Economic Papers Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Oxford Economic Papers Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected reasonably fast after 2 weeks to submission. No comments from the editor though. Weird decision as the paper was not far from being accepted at a better journal. Okay experience overall 2015 05/05/15
Oxford Economic Papers Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 02/22/13
Oxford Economic Papers Desk Reject 3 N/A 2 2014 05/07/15
Pacific-Basin Finance Journal Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Extensive and timely report by referee. 2015 05/22/15
Population and Development Review Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Took two months to desk reject, although initial email assured of a very short response time for desk rejecttions 2012 04/01/13
Population and Environment Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected because of formatting issue but invited to resubmit; took a few days for desk rejectioin 2013 01/23/14
Psychometrika Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Not interested in the topic, acceptable decision. 2013 08/12/13
Public Choice Accepted 1 1 2 first response in about 4 weeks. 2015 06/02/15
Public Choice Accepted 2 2 3 Very helpful comments. 2012 02/03/13
Public Choice Accepted 1 1 2 Very efficient. 2012 01/04/13
Public Choice Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2011 04/15/13
Public Choice Ref Reject 5 3 2 rejected after 1 revision, terrible AE 2011 08/02/13
Public Choice Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 1 good report, 1 useless 2013 10/12/14
Public Choice Ref Reject 12 N/A 0 Horrible process. Waited a year for two low quality reports. 2014 04/27/15
Public Choice Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 One good report, one bad report. Nice comments and feedback from Associate Editor 2014 10/11/14
Public Choice Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Referee report was positive and recommended R&R. Editor then read the paper and rejected it. 2013 11/25/13
Public Choice Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Quick desk reject and no comments of substance (form letter) but no cost of submission. So not good but frankly much better than other journals 2014 01/30/14
Public Choice Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Editor desk rejected after a couple of weeks due to lack of fit. 2012 01/08/13
Public Choice Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2010 01/09/13
Public Choice Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2014 03/07/14
Public Choice Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Your paper is not fit for public choice try with public economics. 2012 04/23/14
Public Choice Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Editor desk rejected after a couple of days due to lack of fit. 2013 01/20/14
Public Choice Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 04/23/14
Public Choice Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Desk rejected in 2 days. The editor suggested to try a more mainstream Public Finance journal (I think may paper could have fit Public Choice but fair enough I will try another Public Finance journal) 2014 06/20/14
Public Choice Desk Reject 12 3 2 very bad handling process 2010 01/01/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Accepted 2 2 4 Good process. One very grumpy referee report. 1 on the fence. 2 positive. Katz had very clear advice regarding revision (also what parts of the referee reports to ignore). Good process (and none of the coauthors are from 02139). 2011 02/14/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 2 good (short) referee reports, good comments from Katz as well. He recommended 3 other (good) journals to try. Lucky to get past desk reject. 2014 06/21/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 3 2 good, one grumpy referee report. Comments from Larry very helpful. Ultimately fair. 2013 02/14/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 2012 07/16/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 2012 12/25/12
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Very happy LRM made it past desk. One good report who saw potential and offered advice, one who just didn't like the idea. 2015 03/16/15
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 3 3 reports in 28 days. Rejection was fair, nice comments by Katz who suggested AEJ:Policy, REStat, and top fields. 1 referree was critical, but offered great suggestions, other 2 were mediocre at best. 2015 05/08/15
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Good reports, efficient process, we just didn't meet Katz's "general interest" standard 2013 05/25/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2011 12/23/12
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/24/12
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Very fast, two high quality referee reports. 2013 02/13/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 2012 12/21/12
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Katz wrote his usual bs about my fascinating paper. Ref reports were okay. One decent, the other sloppy. 2013 04/07/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 0 N/A 1 Great process, fortunate to make it past desk as LRM grad student, very helpful ref report received 8 days after submission. 2013 12/17/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Two reports - one thorough and one probably by a grad student 2011 01/04/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 2013 09/01/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 3 2014 08/22/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 One good referree report, one positive but unhelpful, one negative and entirely useless. Editor was Barro. 2012 04/30/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 2011 12/20/12
Quarterly Journal of Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 2014 09/06/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Rejected by Katz, with comments, in less than 8 hours. 2011 04/30/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 in less than 24h 2012 08/02/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 quick. Suggested to submit to a good journal. 2014 02/28/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 01/02/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Wrong zipcode 2014 07/30/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 06/03/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 5 days for a desk reject. But the editor read the paper, and recommends Econometrica or JET or TE 2013 03/17/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2011 12/24/12
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 5 days, paper is too specific for QJE, Helpman suggested another journal 2014 12/06/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 09/17/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 I am afraid that your paper is too narrow for the Quarterly Journal of Economics. A specialized journal is more suitable for this contribution. 2009 04/23/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Katz rejected my paper before I was done submitting it; suspect time travel 2014 01/08/15
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Katz rejected in less than 24 hours with some comments. 2012 12/20/12
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Katz rejected in two hours with comments that seemed to be written for some other paper. 2013 11/06/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 useful advice 2013 06/11/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 What can I say? I'm not part of the club 2010 01/29/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Rejected within 24hrs by Katz. Suggested AEJ:AE, RESTAT and top field. 2014 08/06/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Came back within 4 hours, nice letter by Katz with suggestions of where to submit 2015 02/04/15
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Usual "not general enough" comment. 2014 01/07/15
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 A couple nice comments from Shleifer after two days 2014 05/25/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Barro Rejected: less than 24 hours. 2012 12/20/12
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2010 01/09/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 < 1day 2015 06/08/15
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Quick with a suggestion to go top field. 2014 03/31/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 within 12 hours 2012 12/28/12
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in 1 week. Editor suggested field journal. 2014 01/28/15
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Less than 24 hours. 2014 09/27/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Very quick response from Larry Katz. Not so many comments; recommended two very good field journals. 2014 06/09/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 06/03/13
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 fast and uninformative 2014 02/20/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Katz rejected in four hours after carefully confirming author affiliations. Comments based entirely on abstract. 2013 05/07/14
Quarterly Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Helpman rejected in 6 days, no comment 2011 12/21/12
RAND Journal of Economics Accepted 4 3 2 Very impressed with comments received by the co-editor (Mark Armstrong), which were more substantive than the reviewers. 2010 02/28/14
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 2013 10/29/13
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 One report useful, the other contentless 2013 12/14/13
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2011 01/29/13
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 3 rejected on the base of not having large neough contribution, reports are okay, but the negative referee is very rude in the report 2013 03/31/15
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 2011 01/29/13
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 sad but fair 2013 06/17/13
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Solid, fair reports. 2014 03/21/15
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Decent reports highlighting different issues, mostly sympathetic, but tough. Editor rejected, but I have a feeling that both refs recommended R&R for different reasons. 2013 07/17/14
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 One good report (weak r&r). the other report is empty (rejection). 2013 02/18/14
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 9 N/A 2 2011 12/21/12
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 theory; 2 decent referee reports and 1 suggestive letter from an editor 2013 12/06/13
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 1 ref report good. others ref reports okay 2011 04/12/13
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2014 01/06/15
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 nice letter from editor, good and fair comments 2014 01/29/15
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 2011 01/10/13
RAND Journal of Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2010 08/02/13
RAND Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 (Fair?) Desk reject after 3 days. Editor suggested JIE. Submission refund. 2013 02/04/14
RAND Journal of Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2 weeks. Had a paper published there recently. Editor said he appreciated the previous paper but seemed to reject this one (which is probably better) since it fits in with a similar literature. Disappointing. 2012 02/28/14
RAND Journal of Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2 weeks 2014 09/30/14
Regional Science and Urban Economics Accepted 3 1 2 Good experience. 2014 03/12/15
Regional Science and Urban Economics Accepted 3 1 2 Constructive comments by both referees, nice suggestion by editor 2012 07/07/13
Regional Science and Urban Economics Accepted 3 1 1 2011 01/11/13
Regional Science and Urban Economics Accepted 3 1 2 2010 02/13/13
Regional Science and Urban Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Fast and Efficient Journal. One very good report, one OK. 2012 02/15/13
Regional Science and Urban Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2015 04/27/15
Regional Science and Urban Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Useless reports. 2012 01/19/13
Regional Science and Urban Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Fast and Efficient Journal. One very good report, one OK. 2012 02/15/13
Regional Science and Urban Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Desk rejected within 10 days because the topic was not fit to the journal (it may have been a reasonable response given the topic). No complains. 2014 06/20/14
Regional Science and Urban Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Editor desk rejected in 24 hours 2014 11/09/14
Regional Science and Urban Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Editor is bonkers, he said article was outside scope of journal.when it was clearly regiona/urban economics article. 2013 08/05/13
Research in Economics Accepted 6 1 1 A bit long but very helpful referee report 2013 12/10/13
Research in Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 The new editor rejected the paper 2 days after submitted it. The decision is quite fair and briefly justified. He gave few recommendations. 2014 11/04/14
Resource and Energy Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 2013 10/01/13
Resource and Energy Economics Ref Reject 10 N/A 1 2012 04/24/14
Resource and Energy Economics Ref Reject 8 N/A 1 2011 10/30/13
Review of Economic Studies Pending 0 N/A 0 2013 09/17/14
Review of Economic Studies Pending 7 N/A 3 Very good reports that help us to improve the paper a lot. The editor make effort to found the right people to read the paper. 2013 01/13/15
Review of Economic Studies Pending 0 N/A 0 2013 02/10/13
Review of Economic Studies Accepted 6 6 2 Excellent editorial service from Bruno Biais. Good comments from refs that really helped the paper. 2009 01/29/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 8 N/A 2 2011 12/24/12
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 7 N/A 3 2011 12/22/12
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Decent reports 2013 06/27/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 4 N/A 4 Split referees, Adda came down on the side of the negative ones. Not very useful comments from any of them. 2013 02/19/14
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 21 N/A 2 One report was not very helpful. I think the editor may have been waiting on a 3rd report, glad they didn't wait any longer (20 weeks is enough to wait for a reject). 2014 07/21/14
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Two useless reports plus one from someone that has obviously not read the paper. 2013 02/13/14
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 7 N/A 3 2011 12/21/12
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 5 N/A 4 Fair process: with 3 very different reccomendations from the refereees, the editor asked for a fourth one. Though nothing extremely deep, comments were of acceptable quality. 2013 04/02/14
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 5 N/A 5 Reject and Resubmit 2010 12/21/12
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 6 4 0 2013 09/17/14
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Solid reports; fair rejection. 2009 01/29/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 0 N/A 0 In reality, the paper is poorly motivated and the link between the model and the anecdotal evidence discussed in the introduction is not clear. More importantly, the analysis is flawed by a number of major shortcomings. The model is not presented in a clear and intelligible way. The structure of the game, the policy and strategy spaces and other concepts are not introduced with sufficient clarity. There are several claims that are either wrong or very poorly explained (e.g., a Nash equilibrium need not be Pareto optimal!). In general, it is difficult to follow the derivations due to a lack of intuitive explanations. Finally, the empirical exercise at the end of the paper is questionable on several grounds. The equation to be estimated is not well explained and basic econometric issues (e.g., the problems related to the inclusion of lagged dependent variables) are not discussed. For these reasons, the paper does not meet the standards for consideration in a top-5 journal. 2009 04/23/14
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 8 N/A 4 very good reports 2012 02/11/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 2012 02/13/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 2013 11/01/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 1 report from a senior researcher, who thinks that our paper is a fine exercise but suits field journal better. The other referee took 7 month without giving back the report. The editor wrote the 2nd report. 2014 01/13/15
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 8 N/A 4 very good reports 2012 02/11/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 3 3 3 One crappy referee report, one useful referee report, one grad student referee report. 2014 07/27/14
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Two good reports. One useless. 2012 04/02/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 One report o.k., one useless report 2011 04/04/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 one good report, one very good report 2013 05/27/14
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 01/16/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 Good report and fast desk 2013 06/03/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 one very weird report, asking to cite an unknown WP, from a PhD student... 2005 08/02/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 interesting and polite reports. In general, efficient journal 2014 12/03/14
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Useful comments from editor; one really great ref. report and a couple of pretty good ones. 2012 03/01/13
Review of Economic Studies Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 ambivalent 2013 01/25/14
Review of Economic Studies Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2010 12/21/12
Review of Economic Studies Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Not big enough contribution. Editor clearly read the paper. Recommended second tier general interest journals. 2015 05/19/15
Review of Economic Studies Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 2011 08/02/13
Review of Economic Studies Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 too long for desk reject? 2011 04/13/13
Review of Economic Studies Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 06/03/13
Review of Economic Studies Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2010 01/09/13
Review of Economic Studies Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Editor suggested a field journal. 2013 06/20/13
Review of Economic Studies Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Two weeks. Editor obviously read the paper. Contribution too small. 2014 07/24/14
Review of Economic Studies Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Don't submit if not in the right zipcode. 2014 03/27/14
Review of Economics and Statistics Pending 20 N/A 1 2012 11/06/13
Review of Economics and Statistics Accepted 14 6 3 Very slow, but fair process overall. 2 very good reports and one poor report. 2012 02/25/15
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 After 6 months I got an extremely low quality report; looked like the reviewer had no idea about the paper or even the field in general. Horrible experience. Never again. From here on, AEJs are the way to go outside top 5. 2013 07/21/14
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 4 N/A 4 2011 08/02/13
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 13 N/A 3 Fair referee reports, but I had to wait pretty long. 2013 09/10/14
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 5 N/A 3 Very good quality ref reports 2011 12/25/12
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 9 N/A 2 The reviewer's reports came up 2 months after submission. It than took the editor (Mark Watson) another 6 months to read reports and make a decision. Very inefficient handling process 2009 01/07/13
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 7 N/A 1 highly unprofessional, the report is not useful, comments make little sense and contradict to the extant literature on the topic. 2014 07/03/15
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Very good referee reports. Mark Watson was the editor 2010 12/22/12
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 10 N/A 3 Two out of three referee reports were good one was much less. Thorough review 2013 07/29/14
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 2012 02/02/13
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 7 N/A 0 After 7 months at the journal, I get one extremely low quality referee report. The report must have been farmed out to some grad student who couldn't write. I understand there is variability in this process, but it was a terrible experience. 2012 07/17/14
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 The referees raised concerns that we were not able to see before, and they were fair. Gorodnichenko was nice. Wrote that he enjoyed the paper very much, but commented that to address the referees comments, we need to do "very major work." 2014 02/18/15
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 8 N/A 3 Reports were pretty good. Eight months is a long wait though. 2014 01/22/15
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 2012 01/06/13
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 7 N/A 3 Very good and insightful reports 2012 07/30/13
Review of Economics and Statistics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 2 R&R, 1 reject - referee rejected 2013 06/07/13
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Almost two months for desk reject, no submission refund 2012 12/27/12
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Rodrik rejected 10 days after submission, advised a field journal 2010 01/07/13
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 desk rejected in 3 days. The editor likes the idea, but things the method is not new, so recommended to a field journal. 2015 02/13/15
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Amitabh Chandra rejected in one month with no infomation 2013 01/02/14
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 No comments 2013 01/18/14
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Two months to a desk reject, with zero information from the editor's response. Frustrating. 2012 04/30/13
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 desk reject in 10 days 2013 06/04/13
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Took a couple of days. 2012 01/04/13
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject in one day 2013 04/03/13
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Near immediate desk reject (48 hr) 2014 03/28/14
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/21/12
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 2 months for a generic desk rejection with no comment whatsoever.. but of course I am not in the club. 2015 04/09/15
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 no feedback 2015 07/09/15
Review of Economics and Statistics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 It was quick. Basically got a response on the next working day following a weekend. 2012 04/07/13
Review of Economics of the Household Accepted 3 2 2 2013 12/02/13
Review of Economics of the Household Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 08/13/13
Review of Finance Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Good referee report + some comments from AE 2012 12/30/12
Review of Finance Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 ref reports were to the point but could have been higher quality for amount of time under review 2014 08/06/14
Review of Finance Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Worst referee report ever. The discussant in the shitty conf gives better comments. 2012 06/23/13
Review of Finance Ref Reject 2 2 2 2 rounds of r+r 2010 12/28/12
Review of Finance Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 Worst referee report ever with unsubstantiated claims. Hollifield copy-pasted unsubstantiated claims in rejection letter apparently without even having a look on the paper. 2014 10/23/14
Review of Finance Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 Ref report was a joke, inaccurate, full of typos. Seemed to have an agenda, as though I offended his work. Will not submit here again. 2014 01/12/15
Review of Finance Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 2012 01/21/13
Review of Finance Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/28/12
Review of Financial Studies Accepted 2 2 2 1 report (from different referees) each round. 2010 01/29/13
Review of Financial Studies Accepted 1 N/A 1 very efficient process but experience depends crucially on editor 2013 01/16/15
Review of Financial Studies Accepted 2 2 1 3 rounds and then accepted 2007 05/22/14
Review of Financial Studies Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 Garbage referee report. Shame for RFS. 2013 12/07/13
Review of Financial Studies Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 one recommended R&R the other did not read the paper was clearly ideologically biased, the editor sided with the latter 2012 03/28/13
Review of Financial Studies Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 very thorough referee report, comments were mostly related to theoretical motivation, paper was submitted without much change to JFE and eventually accepted there 2008 05/22/14
Review of Financial Studies Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2011 12/27/12
Review of Financial Studies Ref Reject 1 N/A 0 -- Divided referee reports. One was more helpful than the other. 2013 02/16/14
Review of Financial Studies Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 reviewer knew an aspect of the literature and appeared to promote his own unpublished paper under review at the same journal 2013 05/22/14
Review of Financial Studies Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 2011 12/28/12
Review of Financial Studies Ref Reject 1 N/A 3 1 reviewer was clearly an expert, 2 others were less thorough than might be expected 2013 05/22/14
Review of Financial Studies Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 2014 07/07/14
Review of Financial Studies Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 Two reports. One guy who had no clue, the other who had good insight into our paper. Both were helpful because the guy with no clue (reading between the lines) clued us in about what the audience cares about. 2014 07/17/14
Review of Financial Studies Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 one positive referee report, one negative referee report. Editor took issue with a methodological aspect of the paper and rejected 2013 02/24/14
Review of Financial Studies Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 01/29/13
Review of Financial Studies Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/28/12
Review of Financial Studies Desk Reject 2 N/A 2 1 referee report by an idiot that just filled three pages with garbage to look like a better referee; other report was better but still not nearly as smart as QJE referees. Ljunquist is pretty passive 2014 05/25/14
Review of Income and Wealth Accepted 4 1 2 2010 01/10/13
Review of Income and Wealth Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Editor gives no justification whatsoever. Very unprofessional. 2014 08/28/14
Review of International Economics Pending 8 N/A 0 2012 08/02/13
Review of International Economics Accepted 3 5 2 After submission, we got a RR in 12 weeks. Reports were very positive, it took us 12 weeks to resubmit. But then, it took 20 weeks until we got the acceptance. First response was very good (and positive), still there was a long waiting afterwards. Overall, very positive experience. 2014 02/05/15
Review of International Economics Accepted 3 2 2 Very good referee reports. 2011 01/01/13
Review of International Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 One very good report. Seems to be a fair process 2014 10/03/14
Review of International Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 2012 04/15/13
Review of International Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 2012 02/24/13
Review of International Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2014 05/22/15
Review of International Economics Desk Reject 13 N/A 0 13 months for editor to desk reject because the paper has no empirical section 2011 07/27/15
Review of World Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 Low quality referee report. 2012 03/22/13
Review of World Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Two short reports 2012 11/08/13
Review of World Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 One good report, very constructive, the other one rejecting the paper 2011 11/08/13
Small Business Economics Accepted 9 5 1 2011 01/07/13
Small Business Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Rejected due to data limitation. One very good referee report (I feel he has pubs in AER, JPE) and one useless report (he doesn't know anything about business economics) 2012 01/08/13
Small Business Economics Ref Reject 3 2 1 Rejected after 1st R&R. The editor picked a new (hostile) referee in the 2nd round. 2013 09/10/13
Small Business Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 editor rejected in 6 days 2012 01/12/13
Social Choice and Welfare Pending 14 N/A 0 2013 09/17/14
Social Choice and Welfare Accepted 3 3 2 Nice referees... 2011 01/15/13
Social Choice and Welfare Accepted 4 2 2 2010 01/09/13
Social Choice and Welfare Accepted 6 5 1 Weird referee... 2008 01/15/13
Social Choice and Welfare Accepted 3 4 2 2011 02/04/13
Social Choice and Welfare Accepted 6 2 2 2008 08/02/13
Social Choice and Welfare Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 2012 08/02/13
Social Indicators Research Accepted 2 1 1 2013 04/24/13
Southern Economic Journal Accepted 5 N/A 2 Excellent review with great advice on how to improve the paper. Associate editors are very professional. Great experience! 2013 01/14/14
Southern Economic Journal Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 2012 12/21/12
Southern Economic Journal Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2012 03/26/13
Southern Economic Journal Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2010 12/21/12
Strategic Behavior and the Environment Pending 2 N/A 2 Very quick refereeing 2014 01/26/15
Strategic Behavior and the Environment Accepted 2 3 2 High quality referee reports 2011 11/28/13
The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Detailed reports, 2 negative, 1 positive; nice letter from co-editor. 2014 04/09/14
The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2014 09/30/14
The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 two months pretty long for a desk reject, but can't really complain about the desk reject itself because the paper is not so great 2014 07/03/14
The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Disappointed it wasn't sent out for review, but can't fault them for speed! 2014 07/28/14
The Manchester School Accepted 6 4 2 One referee seemed inexperienced and little informative comments. 2010 04/29/15
The World Economy Pending 15 N/A 0 I withdraw my submission after 15 months of submission and no answer from the editor 2013 09/11/14
The World Economy Pending 1 N/A 0 Submitted in 2012. Two years later still waiting for referee reports. Have emailed for status to no avail. 2012 11/13/14
The World Economy Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Fair process. One reviewer asking for minor revisions, the other clearly reject the paper. In the end, the editor reject the article 2011 05/01/14
The World Economy Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Referee comments were pretty minor. I am surprised no R&R. 2014 10/23/14
Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2011 01/10/13
Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 Terribly disappointing experience. Osbourne rejected following a 6-7 line bs report by adding his own very cheap comments. We thought we'd receive useful reports even if we got rejected, but this turned out to be a total waste of time. 2012 12/07/13
Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 2012 01/21/13
Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 two good one bad report 2012 01/13/13
Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 1 very good referee report, 1 completely useless 2013 12/21/13
Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2013 11/22/13
Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Very fast. One excellent referee report, one terrible. AE also helpful. 2013 05/23/13
Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 3 Excellent reports that really helped the paper at the next journal. 2010 01/29/13
Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 3 Efficient journal and good reports 2012 06/03/13
Urban Studies Accepted 7 6 3 2011 12/23/12
Urban Studies Ref Reject 2 N/A 5 Terrible reports, but quick. 2014 06/21/14
Urban Studies Ref Reject 2 N/A 5 Terrible reports, but quick. 2014 06/21/14
Urban Studies Ref Reject 2 N/A 5 Terrible reports, but quick. 2014 06/21/14
Urban Studies Ref Reject 3 3 3 Very bad reports. Referees didn't read the article properly! 2014 08/15/14
World Bank Economic Review Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Referees lukewarm, Foster took time and effort to explain his decision, also indicated a number of pathways to strengthen the paper. Good experience. 2014 10/09/14
World Bank Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2014 08/14/14
World Bank Economic Review Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Useful comments from editor 2014 12/02/14
World Bank Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 The editor read the paper and gave some comments and suggestions. 2015 06/30/15
World Development Accepted 6 4 3 relatively high quality referee reports, huge amount of work needed to format the paper according to the editorial guidelines as they receive little typesetting support from publisher. 2011 01/06/13
World Development Accepted 10 5 2 Accepted after first round 2013 03/15/14
World Development Accepted 3 1 2 Quick process, nice editor. 2013 04/28/14
World Development Accepted 12 1 4 One very good report; three okay. 2011 01/07/13
World Development Accepted 8 1 3 Took a long time for first response which suggested feasible changes and asked for a revised submission. After resubmitting, accepted in 2 weeks without going to referees. Moderately useful reports. 2011 12/04/13
World Development Accepted 7 3 3 2011 12/22/12
World Development Accepted 3 5 3 2013 06/10/14
World Development Accepted 3 3 3 useful reports and pretty quick response 2012 11/26/13
World Development Accepted 3 2 3 Long time to edit and format after acceptance. Good ref reports. Nice editor. 2012 01/15/13
World Development Accepted 6 1 2 Surprisingly efficient process given the other comments here on the journal. Also good editing support. 2013 03/11/14
World Development Accepted 5 1 3 2014 02/02/15
World Development Ref Reject 6 N/A 3 One excellent and positive report. One is OK, other one is exteremly negative. 2014 10/25/14
World Development Ref Reject 5 N/A 3 1 good, 1 okay and one bad review. Extensive reviews though. Some feasible and some not feasible suggestions. Overall I feel paper rejected because of third negative review. 2014 05/01/15
World Development Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Good reports. 2014 01/28/15
World Development Ref Reject 3 3 3 Rejected after two rounds of R&R 2014 12/20/14
World Development Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in a week 2013 06/06/13
World Development Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2012 12/21/12
World Development Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in a few days. 2015 06/30/15
World Development Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk Rejected in 10 Days 2012 12/22/12
World Development Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Quick rejection. Paper was not a fit so got rejection in 3 days. 2013 01/29/15