MEASUREMENT SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY

I have no idea about the final handling of this journal after the second submission.

2022.9.14 Submitted
2022.10.7 Requested revisions
2022.10.22 Revised
2022.11.8 Second round of revisions
2022.11.12 Revised again

Up until this point, everything seemed normal, with the second round of revisions mainly addressing minor issues. However, something absurd happened. After a long wait, I couldn't understand why the review process took so long when there were only a few changes made during the second round of revisions. In February of this year, I became quite frustrated and sent a reminder letter.

2023.2.21 Rejected

I have experienced revisions being rejected before, so I checked the comments to see what they were. Two reviewers, neither of whom had seen the original manuscript or the revision process, simply stated that the paper lacked innovation and there were already similar studies. Isn't that obvious? They were reviewing work done almost half a year ago. Of course, there were similar studies.

I have submitted many papers and reviewed many papers. I have been rejected many times and given many rejection comments. However, this is the first time I have seen such an irresponsible decision regarding the rejection of a revised paper from this journal. It feels like the decision-making process, from the editor to the reviewers, has nothing to do with the content of the paper. It seems to be based solely on moods. Editor, why did you even receive the comments if you're just going to forward them without looking at them?

Pure speculation, but either this journal is overwhelmed with submissions and has to reject a large number of them, or the editorial level is unable to keep up, or there are no reviewers willing to review papers for this journal. Regardless of the reason, I suggest avoiding this journal if you're in a hurry.

2021.09.14 Submission
2021.12.03 Major revision, one month deadline
2021.12.19 Resubmission
2022.01.02 Copyright completion
2022.01.14 Minor revision
2022.01.17 Revised
2022.01.20 Preliminary acceptance
2022.01.21 Formally accepted
2022.01.22 Online

As long as there is innovation and there are controls for simulation and experimentation, it is very good.
There were two reviewers, both not very knowledgeable in the field, but they reviewed it very carefully. One focused on "measurement uncertainty" and made me reanalyze all the data. One requested a few additions regarding the adequacy of the article content. They were both quite friendly.
There was a requirement for English expression. I used their English editing service through their submission system, which cost 200 RMB. The results came out quickly, and they clearly marked any spelling mistakes, grammar errors, inappropriate expressions, and improper word choices. It was really helpful for English writing. Next time, I will definitely write according to their requirements and there will be no problems. Unfortunately, when I tried to use it again later, it had been changed and was now represented by a domestic company, and it was not user-friendly anymore. However, after making one revision, I knew how to write it, so I won't need it in the future.