Assistant Professor, Macroeconomics. One report was an absolute travesty and surely had to be disregarded. Pure pure waste of time and disgrace to the profession having journals around. The referee seemed to be under great emotional distress. Just a generic email, no particular reason provided, With editor in 3 days, rej in another 2 days. Two referee reports, each was half a page with very general comments about the lack of contribution to a general readership. Bad process. Recommended field journals Clueless editor thinks results are of narrow interest. Then again, it only took a couple of weeks to get the rejection. Took almost 2 months to generically desk reject w/o any information. Would definitely submit here again. Pretty useless referee reports. Desk rejection in 6 minutes with a "pretended" letter, which could be used for any paper. Good experience, good editor, great referees that really put me through my paces but helped deliver a better paper. Very quick handeling, decent reports. "not enough contribution". Excellent editor, balanced referees and good timing. Desk rejected within 7 days. A stronger editor could have handled the submission more efficiently also pointing out the weakness of the 2nd report. One excellent report, one mediocre report. Very useful comments. Editor claimed to have two reports but gave me only one. Editor misread the title and barely read the abstract. The editor barely read the paper and decided to just reject it At least it was quick response - 11 days. Second report little use. Finance Job Rumors (489,474) General Economics Job Market Discussion (729,762) Micro Job Rumors (15,233) Macro Job Rumors (9,803) European Job Market (101,001) China Job Market (103,523) Industry Rumors (40,348) EconJobRumors - EverybodyWiki Bios & Wiki I haven't received the first response yet. Recommended field journal, and it was in fact eventually published in the top field journal. This was high risk but of course at the end worth it because it is a good journal. Very fast decisions. Finance Job Rumors (489,527) General Economics Job Market Discussion (729,815) Micro Job Rumors (15,246) Macro Job Rumors (9,803) European Job Market (101,029) China Job Market (103,535) Industry Rumors (40,351) One detailed report. Not much to complain about. Three reports, two positive & on point; one negative & showing lack of understanding of structural modelling and estimation. Seemed like he carefully considered the paper. Clearly done day before deadline. Fast publication with reasonable reviewer reports. Referee reports OK. cannot complaint about reports but could have been faster, bad reports, of the type "i don't like it". Not enough contribution. Avoid at all costs.. Revision took about 1 week, one of the reviewers requested additional data/info about the methods used. In hindsight, submitted the paper too prematurely. Desk rejected in 6 days with no explanation. Two high quality reports. Good to be fast, but quality of feedback should be taken care of more at this journal. Co-editor rejects because contribution is not big enough to warrant publication. great experience. one referee pointed to their own working paper which is still not published (jan 2017), Positive: 1 high quality referee report and some comments by the co-editor; Negative: 2 other referee reports of medium to very low quality. Process ended after 1 report. Rejection without arguments/referee report. No letter from the editor. It was most likely copy-pasted from someone elses decision letter, and I know this because they forgot to change the name on it (yes, I received a decision letter with someone else's name on it). Nice words from Editor. 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. 2 strong reports with valid empirical critiques, 1 less so. I had to contact the Editor after 2 months of seeing no change in status on my manuscript. To be fair, some of the editors comments were sharp. Desk reject after 2 months. Extremely fast. desk reject in 2.5 hrs? the other report is empty (rejection). Editor gave me chance to convince other referee. 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. Both referees agreed and specifically pointed out that the manuscript should be published. Quick rejection. One report was very positive, but the second one looked like it was written in ten minutes citing four papers of his own. That indicates he/she did not finish reading the paper. There is only one report called review number 2! Comments are helpful. Very good experience. One good referee report. I received my Ph.D. degree at the University of Chicago in 2022. Wasn't my target journal but I'll take the pub in a recognizable outlet. Reject based on a priori feeling of the reviewer with no scientific arguments but rather personal perception of her/his reading. The editor suggest that the paper is not good enough for ET! Editorial process was efficient and fair. Very good clarification and additional comments from Associate Editor. Job Market. Desk reject within two days. Good experiences --- fast (1 month for both the first and R&R round), good reports, editor is also very helpful. oh they're good! One very useful report from a critical referee, and one mediocre. the editor roughly read the whole paper and point out a valuable commentvery well run journal, fast and no submission fee! The referee reports were crap (minor points without really saying anything about the research question, the methodology and the results of the paper). Very unprofessional. I submitted two papers and both took a very long time to get referee comments from and the sets of referee comments read like they were written by undergraduate students. Two weeks for R&R. Referee rejected but with very exhaustive and interesting comments, only one report, but it was fair and can help me to improve the paper, Reports are thoughtful and useful for revisions, it took them 11 months to reject with one referee report of about half a page. Very helpful comments. As we addressed all issues in between and it better fitted EL, it was accepted without revision. Less than 3 weeks for the first responses (major R&R) then accepted in less than a week. seven weeks to say poor fit when similar and cited papers are published there. Reviewers likely not in my area; rather superficial comments. Rejected in 4 days, editor said work was done net resting but not broad enough. Disappointing turnaround for this journal. Split decision between R&R and reject, editor took reject. awful experience. The most underutilized channel is Paid Search. 1 month + 10 days for desk rejection. One useless report, and one very useful report. The second editor rejected it. Research Assistant (Pre-Doc) Law and Economics. Most dishonest rejection. Costas Meghir responses all submissions. The AEA provides a guide to the job market process created by John Cawley. All the referees understood what I did in great detail. Very helpful comments and suggestions from three reviewers and editor (Angeletos). Pretty helpful reports. Please add AERi to the combo box. 3 weeks. 2 days from submission to desk rejection. One refree report who made very useful comments that helped significantly improve the paper. One referee gave very constructive comments, but referenced three papers by same person (I'm guess that's who referee was). The paper was under minor revisions. Good experience and good editorial team. Editor appeared to have at least glanced at the paper. desk rejected after thee months. Rather weird outcome but quite quick for a journal of its reputation. Just the process of having the paper withdrawn took 2 months. 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. In terms of rejections this is probably as good as it gets. Poor reports. 19 Jun 2023. Most efficient experience with journals ever! Standard 'not good fit/match for journal'. I got two rounds of R&R. Chat (0) Conferences. Overall horrifying experience. So they had no idea about basic econometrics. Two weeks with very good (2 pages) report from AE. Second one didn't understand the paper and said it was already written. $ 200 is high for an immediat desk rejection, editor was helpful in replying to inquiry regarding reason for desk rejection. Very clubby journal. One referee kept claiming one thing was wrong. not the fastest experience, but high quality comments from referees and the editor who liked the paper. Ref Reports: I'd say one okay, the other so-so. DE claims to have too large acceptance rate. One report was not very helpful. Fair decision. Comments are mainly about rephrasing implications and minor issues. reports. Hello! Desk rejected in 2 weeks. One referee report was very detailed. Editor said all refs must agree for acceptance but only one ref report provided! Took about two weeks. Referee's only objection is flat out incorrect (i discussed report with colleagues in my field). Useful comments from the editor who had to stand in for the unresponsive second referee. Very slow, 4 months waiting of the revise and resubmit, it's now two months since I submitted in and no word. HUMAN HELP: The Placement Chair for the 2022-2023 academic year is Professor Ben Handel, handel@berkeley.edu. Took 4 months to report that the article was not a good fit and return without reports. Long wait. What takes so long? Constructive comments and Nice experimence! very comprehensive report. Next time, I will come back with a vip or friend of the editorial team to have positive a priori. EconJobRumors Wiki Economics Job Market. Editor suggested field journal. Got most thorough, informed, and useful referee reports in 5 years. Referees did not seem to like the paper based on the subject. Nice editor. No reply to my e-mail. This journal is a scam! Got accepted with minor revisions after two wonderful set of comments from the referees. The referee is clearly not up to the task. Bad experience. They took the paper seriously. Desk Rejected after 2 days. Very slow and no much reason given for desk rejection. We were authorized to hire 2 macro candidates, and we have now done so. Scam. Sent a specialized financial accounting paper. Bad experience: subjective report + pretentious editor + journal for friends (econometrics family) = save your money, submit elsewhere. Constructive referee report; said needed more robustness checks, but difficult in word limit. Four line referee report written in a hurry before deadline and before ref obviously had to jet off on holiday. In-depth argumentation why there is no sufficient progress compared to common wisdom. Recommended rejection. Very good experience, competent referees and quick feedback after the resubmission. That sounds fair to me. Other referee reports are okay, not very useful. editor asked to AE who said "nice, but not enough". Withdrew my paper after 8 months of no contact from Editor, referee, etc. The editor (Mallick) gave us some additional advice and was ok with the result. I have never received any good referee reports from JFQA. If you are in a hurry or need one to fill you CV, then choose it.. editor very helpful. Took 5 months in total, 2 reports, a paragraph each. 3rd round 1 month and then accepted. Submitted to conference edition. Quickest desk rejection ever experienced. Desk reject in one day. Referees and editor reports were incredibly useful, Shitty ref report. So there is zero feedback. Very useful referee reports. They will not respond to editorial office inquiries or direct emails to the editors. Clearly a club journal. Referee 2 was completely positive and was clearly knowledgeable of field. Horrible experience, and it is not even that good a journal! Economics Job Market. Soon it became like a bar that doesn't kick out any assholes and now its a collection of assholes who happen to do economics. More importantly, the analysis is flawed by a number of major shortcomings. Avoid this journal by any means. General Economics Job Market Discussion (729,806) Micro Job Rumors (15,245) Macro Job Rumors (9,803) European Job Market (101,027) China Job Market (103,534)
Documentary On The Death Of The Apostles,
Natasha Deibler New Husband,
Trailside Village Green Township,
Christopher Cunanan Interview,
Articles E