妞妞XC 2023-05-19

May 13, 2023 submit - This means that something should be submitted on May 13, 2023.
May 14, 2023 With Editor - This means that something is currently with an editor on May 14, 2023.

科小研 2023-05-19

I want to ask, did the editor not give you any formatting suggestions when you first returned it for revision? Why is there a need to modify the format later? Or is it that the editor was not satisfied with the modifications made based on the initial formatting suggestions, and requested further modifications?

UURSELF 2023-05-19

20230105 Due to the epidemic, the experiment cannot be completed. Request for extension.
20230116 Revision submitted - with editor - under review. Review invitations accepted: 2+.
20230124 Major revision - reviewers accepted, many suggestions for formatting changes proposed by the editor.
20230129 Submitted.
20230129 Major revision - editor expressed dissatisfaction and requested further revisions.
20230211 Submitted.
20230211 Accepted.

Both the editor and reviewers handled the process quickly and without delay. The reviewers' questions were also constructive. The main issue was my own low efficiency, which caused a delay in time. Otherwise, it could have been completed in two months. I hope the journal continues to improve.

UURSELF 2023-05-19

20221103 Submitted to 【International Journal of Mechanical Science】
20221103 Under editor's review
20221106 Under review
20221107 Review invitation accepted: 1
20221116 Review invitations accepted: 2+
20221117 Review invitations accepted: 2+ Additional reviewers added
20221122 Review completed: 1
20221126 Review completed: 2
20221205 Review completed: 2+ Should have completed 3 reviews
20221206 Review completed: 2+ Should have completed 4 reviews
20221206 Review completed, decision made the same evening: Major revision required, 6 reviewers.

taylor1993 2023-05-19

No change of reviewer, the reviewer agreed to accept it, and the editor made a lot of formatting changes based on the paper (even more than the comments made after the first review). After the modifications were made according to the editor's suggestions, the editor continued to submit it for external review. M.W is a very good editor ?.

西西__ 2023-05-18

Hello, may I ask if the change of reviewer is the reason for the revision being sent for major revisions again?

taylor1993 2023-05-18

2.20 Submitted
3.19 Major revision
3.29 Article revised
4.15 Minor revision
4.19 Article revised
4.25 Major revision
5.2 Article revised
5.18 Completed accept

The process from submission to acceptance took 87 days, which is about 3 months. It went through major revisions, minor revisions, and major revisions again. The editor-in-chief, M.W, had strict requirements (providing corresponding formatting suggestions based on the shortcomings of the paper, and there would be more suggestions if there were many flaws). The reviewers were also very meticulous, and their comments required careful consideration. This article is innovative and, combined with the journal's efficient review process, IJMS was chosen as the preferred option. If time was not a concern, MSSP could also be considered.

妞妞XC 2023-05-17

I would like to ask the experts, how do you view a track? My senior submitted after me and received feedback in the afternoon, while I am still "with editor." We both submitted manuscripts recommended by our teacher. Why is there such a difference?

qwe202304 2023-05-15

Me too, it's been a month and there's still only one reviewer who agreed to review. What should we do? Hey classmate, what's your situation?

小强 2023-05-05

Thank you for clarifying, big bro. Both of my similar reviewers completed the review for my research paper, and it was initially shown as "under review." However, I recently noticed that there is an additional reviewer assigned. I suspect that my situation is indeed a case where the two initial reviewers had significantly differing opinions, leading to one of them recommending rejection.

小强 2023-05-05

Boss, I have also encountered a similar situation. May I ask what the final feedback from the review is? In the morning, it was requested to complete the review, but in the afternoon, it became a reviewing state. Is it because there was a rejection comment?

小强 2023-04-29

I really envy, learn from the boss.

小强 2023-04-29

I'm really envious, this person is amazing.

Strive! 2023-04-28

Received at Editorial Office
9 Jan 2023
Article revised
7 Apr 2023
Article accepted for publication
27 Apr 2023
Accepted after three and a half months

taylor1993 2023-04-25

Gave some minor revisions, the chief editor gave them in the morning Beijing time, which should be past 1 am in the UK. I made the modifications quickly and submitted them in 3 days. However, the result was another long RRC (reviewer revision cycle) status.

科小研 2023-04-25

Did you give any suggestions?

12shier 2023-04-15

May I ask how it was eventually changed? I also received feedback saying that it was not revised according to his suggestions, but it didn't mention specifically what should be revised. The other reviewers all agreed and said that if it is not properly revised, it will be rejected.

sunngy 2023-04-14

What do you all think of Teacher Wang the editor?

Jacques 2023-04-14

Excuse me, everyone, is it necessary to have three reviewers for IJMS, or is it not possible with only two?

taylor1993 2023-04-12

Today is the 9th day of the RRC. I think there are mainly two situations: 1. Not all of the reviewers' comments have come back, and there are reviewers who need to re-review. 2. The recent number of submissions is too large or the editors are too busy. The first situation is more likely because senior editors are efficient, while assistant editors may be slower.

taylor1993 2023-04-12

Every submission is actively participated by the MW editor-in-chief, so be prepared for it. ?

Anchor 2023-04-12

The editor-in-chief of this journal, M.W, is really troublesome. The first time I submitted my paper, it was directly rejected. He gave some suggestions for revisions and asked me to resubmit after making the changes. When I received the reviewer's comments, his suggestions were even more numerous than the reviewer's, mostly related to formatting. If I didn't follow his advice even slightly, it wouldn't be acceptable. If your paper is assigned to this editor, good luck to everyone. It's really torturous, but fortunately, the outcome is good.

科小研 2023-04-11

It has been more than two weeks since the RRC, and I don't know when to provide feedback.

ap 2023-04-11

Can't believe it... Just voted one hour ago.

sunngy 2023-04-11

I just lost yesterday, what a bad luck.

Songshangwei 2023-04-11

In the morning, the required reviews were completed. But at noon, it became "under review" again. Did you find another reviewer for yours?

Yizz 2023-04-11

Same as 14, the status does not change.

Jacques 2023-04-11

Has the editorial office taken a vacation for 14 days?

xuhuadong 2023-04-10

Hello, may I ask if your manuscript has been handed over to the editor? I submitted mine 12 days ago and it is still "submitted".

taylor1993 2023-04-08

Normal speed, it takes around 4 months. As you can see, the articles published above were mostly received within 2-5 months, with a few being exceptionally fast. The characteristic of this journal is that the editor-in-chief generally reviews submissions very quickly. Those that are particularly slow are either due to a large number of submissions, obscure topics that editors are not interested in, or they have previously submitted to the journal and were rejected without making necessary changes (to the title) before resubmitting. The actions of the reviewers may not necessarily be fast, so I think 4-5 months is a normal time frame, and 2-3 months is considered very fast.