ECOTOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY

In the case of inviting three reviewers for the second review, accepting two, and completing two, you can contact Elsevier's English customer service to urge the manuscript. If the manuscript is not processed after multiple reminders, you can ask the customer service to contact the editor-in-chief or journal manager for assistance, but it may not necessarily be effective. This journal is from Egypt, with Deputy Editor Mohamed Abdel-Daim, and it is normal for the system to not be updated for up to a month. The manuscript was revised on 3.24, and a reminder was sent on 3.28. On the same day, it was under review. Three original reviewers were invited, and on 4.10, two review comments were received. The third reviewer did not accept the invitation, but the editor did not update the system after 3.28, so it was not possible to invite the third reviewer again and make a decision based on the existing comments. Numerous reminders were sent during this period, and Elsevier actively offered to contact the editor-in-chief and journal manager for assistance, but it seems that it did not have a quick effect. It was not until 5.6 that the editor logged into the system and made an acceptance decision based on the existing two review comments (both were satisfied with the revision and response, and recommended acceptance). The submission process, which lasted for more than five months, ended, with approximately three months wasted in the hands of the editor. The actual review time for the first and second reviews did not exceed two months. I will not consider this journal in the future, and I also hope to find an effective way to complain about Deputy Editor Mohamed Abdel-Daim. This submission, in terms of the novelty and workload of the paper, is far beyond what this journal deserves, and to experience such an unpleasant process is considered a trial in the scientific research journey.

This magazine is terrible. The editors take an extremely long time to process the manuscripts, as if no one is managing it regularly. They only check the system periodically (seemingly every 1-2 weeks) to see everyone's submissions. After I submitted my paper, it took 20 days for the editor to send it for review. They invited 2+ reviewers, received 2 acceptances and 2 completions. According to normal procedure, a decision could have been made directly. However, it is still in the "Under Review" status, and it has been almost a month. I contacted Elsevier customer service during this period, but they only provided official replies, which I don't quite understand. The author guidelines state that at least two reviewers are required, but for the top journals we have submitted to, two reviewers were enough to make a decision. This particular journal is being overly selective, with so many reviewers involved, and yet the overall quality of the articles seems average. It's the first time I've encountered such a slow journal. If it weren't for the fact that I need to complete my thesis during this period, I would have withdrawn my submission and looked for another journal. If you invite 2+ reviewers and only two accept and complete the review, and it has been almost a month, it's not my problem, but the problem of your journal. If there were three, four, five, or six reviewers accepting the review, I would understand the delay. But with only two reviewers accepting and completing the review, and it's been almost a month, if I had submitted to another journal, it probably would have been accepted by now. It's really frustrating. Seeing that even the second review process is dragging on like this, I don't expect to rely on this article for job prospects after the new year. I will never submit to this journal again. It's just too terrible.