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

Abstracts of Working Papers in Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 This journal ceased to exist. 2020 05/01/20

Abstracts of Working Papers in Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 This journal ceased to exist. 2020 05/01/20

Abstracts of Working Papers in Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 This journal ceased to exist. 2020 05/01/20

Abstracts of Working Papers in Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 This journal ceased to exist. 2020 05/01/20

Abstracts of Working Papers in Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 This journal ceased to exist. 2020 05/01/20

Acta Applicandae Mathematicae Accepted 1 3 1 hjgh 2013 12/10/14

Acta Applicandae Mathematicae Accepted 18 4 2 2015 04/26/16

Acta Applicandae Mathematicae Desk Reject 7 N/A 0 A moron judges how smart is the publisher not the paper. 2018 05/14/19

Administration and Society Pending 0 N/A 0 2014 12/12/14

Administration and Society Accepted 0 N/A 0 2010 12/12/14

Administration and Society Accepted 2 3 1 hjty 2013 12/09/14

Administration and Society Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Fast turn around; reviewers gave substantive comments. Poor targeting on my part. 2016 06/26/16

Advances in Economic Analysis & Policy Accepted 1 1 0 2015 11/09/16

Agricultural Economics Accepted 8 3 4 Very hard to respond but comments significantly improved the paper 2015 01/31/17

Agricultural Economics Accepted 8 4 4 Good referees but long process: 3 rounds /16 months 2015 09/12/16

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Pending 4 N/A 0 Desk reject after 4 months :) 2019 09/28/19

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 Accepted 7 2 1 2016 01/15/19

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Accepted 5 3 2 Amazing experience. High quality, detailed referee reports, which substantially improved the paper. Editor provided detailed advice throughout the entire revision process. Average turnaround time was rather long for AEJ standards. Overall, I was very pleased with the process. Strong and professional editors! 2016 04/06/18

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Accepted 3 12 2 Good first round reports, took a while to respond to all the comments. Second round 4 months before acceptance. Good experience. 2016 04/22/18

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Less than a month for two strong referee reports on a non-experimental paper: useful suggestions and some parts of the paper were obviously not clear enough, although no intractable issues so rejection was disappointing. Editor also read the paper and agreed with referees. Fair decision. 2015 10/05/15

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 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 3 2 0 Used reports from AER. Still took 3 months. Pulled a weak R&R. I then spent 2+ months revising, only to be rejected (after another two months), no new reports, but detailed comments from the editor. To be fair, some of the editors comments were sharp. He just wanted me to write a different paper. Still, I lost 7 months overall. Another awful experience -- but par for the course. 2016 11/04/16

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 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 2 N/A 3 Received 2 very nice and 1 okay-ish report. Editor's letter mentioned a 2-1 split in favor of rejection, so she rejected. Unhappy with the outcome of course, but pleased with the process and the handling 2018 09/10/18

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 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 N/A 2 good reports 2012 06/13/14

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 01/02/13

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 2 Useless reports. Poor / no justification for decision. Expected better from an AEJ 2016 07/03/16

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Sad...but at least it is very quick 2017 07/06/17

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 2 N/A 3 Editor sends paper just to his/her peers with predefined ideas. Top scholars if it comes to RCTs, but no broaded view. Clearly a club journal. 2015 12/20/16

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 6 weeks 2015 08/10/15

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 2012 12/30/12

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 It's quick, but the reports are really bad and unhelpful. Didn't make the paper better at all. 2015 07/01/16

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Helpful and fair referee reports. Both referees read the paper in detail, one report four pages and the other five pages. Would submit again. 2017 08/03/17

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 2 N/A 3 3 constructive and useful reports. Good experience. 2019 12/06/19

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 It's quick, but the reports are really bad and unhelpful. Didn't make the paper better at all. 2015 07/01/16

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Not very helpful reports. One was a paragraph long and basically did a lit review. The other did not understand the basic identification strategy in the paper. Editor like the paper but their hands were tied, I guess. 2017 11/19/17

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Helpful and fair referee reports. Would submit again. 2018 06/01/18

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 Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 desk reject - generic letter from editor who did not like the topic. Felt somewhat subjective 2018 01/02/19

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 3 weeks to desk reject. Some warm words from the editor. He wanted to give the paper a careful read and this was not possible immediately. He, however, had the balls to apologize for the delay. Submission fee refund. Would submit again. 2017 12/20/17

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 3 N/A 0 A joke 2018 10/19/18

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Desk reject with generic letter at 3 weeks. Generic letter from editor. 2016 01/02/17

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 desk reject, but editor basically provided a referee report 2015 08/16/15

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 1 day desk rejection by editor. Standard comments, paper's topic just not good enough 2019 01/14/20

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 2011 08/02/13

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 2012 12/22/12

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 great and very useful comments by editor 2017 08/19/17

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Very helpful comments from editor 2015 06/09/16

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 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in one week 2014 03/03/15

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Quick, polite desk rejection from Deming. I wish we had drawn a different editor. Otherwise fine. 2019 04/04/20

American Economic Journal: Applied Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected within two weeks. Fit justification 2017 08/17/17

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 0 N/A 0 Within a week with no justification. No indication that the editor had even read the paper. 2018 01/14/19

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Accepted 3 5 2 Very good and useful referee reports. The editor had read the paper and provided guidance. On the downside, the time between each of the two rounds of R&R was longish. 2014 12/07/17

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 3 N/A 1 Fair decision. Mostly good comments, though not given much detail about main criticism. 2015 01/26/16

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Took rather long, ok reports 2018 03/06/19

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 3 N/A 2 very very good reports 2012 01/01/13

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 2012 12/25/12

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 3 reports: 2 of them really good, one mediocre. 2018 07/25/18

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 About 10 weeks from submission to referee reject. One positive review, one negative, referee took the side of the negative. 2017 08/06/18

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Very fast. Nice letter. Other outlet probably more suitable. 2017 06/10/17

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 3 reports, very quick. (2 very good reports, and 1 did not understand the paper and went full on complaint). 2016 08/19/16

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 Fast, but two very low quality reports 2018 12/21/18

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Quick response. Reports detailed and helpful. 2017 06/02/17

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Very good reports. Not general interest enough. 2015 04/05/16

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 3 reports, very quick. (2 very good reports, and 1 did not understand the paper and went full on complaint). 2016 08/19/16

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 Very nice comments from the Editor 2017 09/30/17

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Rejected with 2 reviews on the grounds of insufficient contribution to literature. 3rd review was pending. One recommended reject, the other R&R. Some good comments from reviewers, but all focused on marginal issues. Not much insight from the editor, whose concerns were rather vague. 2016 07/13/16

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2016 03/08/17

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Good enough experience and fair. Suggested field journal. 2015 01/19/16

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 2 fairly helpful reports. One furstrating assertion by the editor. Seems safe to ignore the submission guideline: "In tables, please report standard errors in parentheses but do not use *s to report significance levels." 2019 05/03/20

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 2013 02/18/14

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Fast and clean. Helpful reports in general. A bit too narrow-minded in my opinion. Editor seemed to have liked the paper despite ref rejection. 2016 07/11/17

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 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 10 days for desk reject. Comments were not very helpful. 2020 04/29/20

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Desk rejected in a bit more than two weeks. The editor did give us advice to split the paper in two, although he didn't really provide a justification for rejection. (As we've seen, courtesy of Raj Chetty and Diamond/Mirrlees, sometimes they split your paper and accept.) 2016 06/06/16

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 Fast. Nice letter from co-editor. 2016 05/29/16

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 12/23/13

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Clear editor had read the paper, helpful comments 2015 08/11/15

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Fair point from editor. 2019 03/08/20

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 several days. frustrating, because paper not assigned to the editor who works in my field 2015 09/27/15

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 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 2 week desk reject. Formulaic letter. At least the fee is refunded. 2017 06/02/17

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Excellent comments from MN, good experience for a desk rejection. 2019 04/04/20

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 Fast. Editor read the paper and deskrejected in less than a week. 2016 10/19/16

American Economic Journal: Economic Policy Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Another desk reject at AEJ: Policy. I am just not part of the club. The second time I was told that my results were "not surprising". 2018 10/31/18

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Pending 9 N/A 2 2019 12/19/19

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 Accepted 3 3 2 Good experience. The editor, Richard Rogerson, is very careful and handles the paper in a timely manner. 2014 12/18/16

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Accepted 3 3 2 Good reports. Excellent editorial work, with very clear road-map of how to address referee concerns. 2017 01/09/19

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Good experience. 1 extremely helpful report and 2 so so ones. 2015 04/08/16

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 2 N/A 2 Paper very close to editor's (Rogerson) field of interest. One rubbish review from a referee who had no idea what the paper was about. The other review was somewhat on point in its criticism, though I can'r give him/her the credit as the shortcoming was itself mentioned in the paper. While harping on the issue, provided no insights as to how one can go about it. Not to say, the shortcoming is an accepted norm till one finds a better way. Very, very disappointed! 2016 04/03/17

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 Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Good report. Rejected for a good reason. 2015 02/04/16

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 Good experience. The editor (Midrigan) collects three reports within 75 days. Two are helpful, one is less useful. Would submit again. 2019 08/13/19

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 2 N/A 2 Useful reports. 2016 03/16/17

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 Really bad experience (Midrigan was the editor). Just one very low quality report. It just decided not to believe the empirical analysis. Also, did not bother to understand the theoretical contribution. Disappointed 2018 03/22/18

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 editor very helpful. 1 good report and 1 not so good. 2014 10/04/15

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Useful reports, good summary by editor. Would submit again. 2017 11/30/17

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2012 03/26/13

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 1 N/A 1 2011 12/22/12

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2 referee reports: 1 very detailed recommending revisions; other useless. wanted to reject from the outset. editor(s) provided good comments too. but would not give me a chance to deliver the revisions. good process overall 2018 07/14/18

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2 referee reports: 1 very detailed recommending revisions; other useless. wanted to reject from the outset. editor(s) provided good comments too. but would not give me a chance to deliver the revisions. good process overall 2018 07/14/18

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Rogerson very quickly pointed out the paper did not merit publication. Very good experience: I wish all my rejected submissions were as fast and polite. 2017 05/31/17

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject within same day 2020 06/17/20

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2011 08/02/13

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Good feedback from eitor, very quick desk reject 2015 03/28/16

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2011 12/22/12

American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Extremely fast and thoughtful. It is a pity it was rejected, but I appreciate the quick response. 2016 03/23/17

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Pending 4 N/A 3 Good reports and good work by Asker. 2015 03/01/16

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Pending 3 N/A 2 2012 12/24/12

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Pending 0 N/A 2 Second round--took less than a month to get 2 detailed second reports from referees--impressive! 2016 07/28/16

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 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 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 3 N/A 2 2015 04/19/16

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Ref Reject 9 N/A 3 Very Slow 2018 09/25/19

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2012 01/10/13

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 One ref gave R&R; the other two were rejections for not being of sufficient interest for AEJM. Editor agreed with them. Useful reports. 2017 11/18/17

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Ref Reject 18 N/A 0 Horner is a disaster! One report after 18 months. 2018 01/13/20

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Ref Reject 9 N/A 1 9 months for 1 2-page referee report. Absolutely pathetic handling by Horner. Will never submit again 2018 03/12/19

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 Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 7 months and two really bad reports 2019 06/18/20

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Relatively quick turnaround, but, reports were not particularly helpful. 2016 06/17/16

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 Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 ~6 weeks for DR; suggested top fields 2018 04/20/18

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2016 07/22/16

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Although desk-rejected, I am very satisfied. The new editor (Leeat Yariv) did a great job: She indeed read the paper and gave constructive comments. Will submit again. 2020 06/08/20

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 No connection= rejection 2015 04/13/15

American Economic Journal: Microeconomics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 be viewed as too specific. suggest some field journals 2018 08/03/18

American Economic Review Pending 0 N/A 0 2016 03/21/17

American Economic Review Pending 0 N/A 0 2014 01/12/15

American Economic Review Pending 0 N/A 0 very quick answer. Advise field journal 2016 11/30/16

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 Accepted 3 1 3 2012 05/08/13

American Economic Review Accepted 4 4 3 My paper on the "The Impact of MTV's 16 and Pregnant on Teen Childbearing" was quickly accepted due to its relevance and awesome nature. 2014 12/03/15

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 1 3 3 Expected approval. 2019 08/15/19

American Economic Review Accepted 5 3 4 Clear suggestions with R&R decision from Hillary Hoynes. Good process. Got accepted after 2nd round. 2013 09/26/15

American Economic Review Accepted 0 N/A 0 Had a theory paper accepted to AER earlier this months overcoming mostly negative reviewers. Even though the outcome is positive, I blame the editor for not selecting competent enough referees to begin with. 2016 10/31/18

American Economic Review Accepted 6 6 2 2010 12/22/12

American Economic Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 AER Insights: very general reviews, nothing to improve the paper contentwise, but will help to improve the writeup until the next reject. 2017 06/03/18

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 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 2 Good reports. One report is esp helpful. 2017 11/13/17

American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Good referees 2012 03/18/13

American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2012 12/21/12

American Economic Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2016 02/28/18

American Economic Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 AER Insights: very general reviews, nothing to improve the paper contentwise, but will help to improve the writeup until the next reject. 2017 06/02/18

American Economic Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 No substantive comments from any of the three referees. Just that paper did not meet the bar. Also one referee was clueless and did not read the paper. 2018 12/17/18

American Economic Review Ref Reject 5 N/A 0 2010 08/02/13

American Economic Review Ref Reject 2 N/A 4 Fast turn around, 3 detailed reports, 1 clueless polisci. Editor didn't believe our identification. 2017 08/19/17

American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 5 Most of the refs did not read the paper, or only skimmed it. Many, many factual errors about the paper. Refs gave some okay minor comments but no big, subtantive critiques. The results just didn't fit their priors. 2017 07/10/17

American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 Contribution not new enough relative to the existing literature. 2015 06/11/16

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 2 N/A 3 Two sloppy reports, one useful. Good experience in general, the editor recommended a field journal. 2016 05/07/16

American Economic Review Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2014 08/19/15

American Economic Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 4 Lengthy, in-depth reports. One positive, three negative. Not much to complain about. 2015 12/02/15

American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2012 01/09/13

American Economic Review Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 A short piece from an expert in the field. Slightly more informative than a desk rejection. Appreciate the quick turnaround. 2017 01/03/18

American Economic Review Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 only one report (quite helpful). The second one was a "consultation by telephone" but no feedback to us. Editor was really nice. Reason: "not enough general interest" 2018 12/06/18

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 0 N/A 3 Good experience overall, only took 2 weeks, two short reports, one very useful. 2017 07/10/17

American Economic Review Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 2016 01/30/17

American Economic Review Ref Reject 6 N/A 0 Fair experience. 3 reports. Referees ok, not great. 2014 10/08/15

American Economic Review Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 2012 12/27/12

American Economic Review Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 6 weeks for two reasonable referee reports. Rejection reason: not general interest enough. Would try again. 2016 08/29/16

American Economic Review Ref Reject 5 N/A 3 2012 11/01/13

American Economic Review Ref Reject 8 N/A 2 2012 12/20/12

American Economic Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 5 More than 5 reports. 2015 12/01/15

American Economic Review Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2011 12/20/12

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 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 7 N/A 3 2012 05/15/13

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 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 3 N/A 2 Good comments, well rejected 2013 04/06/13

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 6 N/A 4 Unfair letter from Emi N. Great letters from four referees and three of them are very positive! 2019 04/07/20

American Economic Review Ref Reject 2 N/A 4 Fair rejection. Contribution not new enough. Very good reports 2016 03/04/17

American Economic Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Crappy reports. Unhelpful, rambling. Great turnaround I guess? 2019 09/27/19

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2015 04/19/16

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 AER:Insights. Very quick and very fair. Excellent desk reject by Larry S. 2020 03/05/20

American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2013 06/19/13

American Economic Review Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Desk rejected after about 1 month. No comments whatsoever, in an un-signed email with 2 generic sentences 2019 05/11/20

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2016 12/09/17

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 0 N/A 0 Uninformative decision 2018 09/23/18

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 About a week to desk reject 2015 08/01/15

American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Recommended field journal (JIE ) 2017 09/10/17

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 1 Week (Desk Reject) 2018 08/27/18

American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Quick return, nice words. 2015 06/03/15

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 0 N/A 0 Fast reject 2015 10/04/15

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Generic letter saying the paper was not fit to general interest journal. No letter from an Associate Editor, so no idea about who rejected the paper. At least turnaround time was fast: 14 days. 2017 08/17/17

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject from Bertrand with zero comments in 15 days. 2016 09/15/16

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/25/12

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2 weeks. Nice letter from the editor. 2016 05/24/16

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject in 2015 04/07/15

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 1 N/A 1 Not sure whether it should be called "desk rejection" as the editor said he asked a friend who is an expert in the field to review my paper rather than sending it to referees. Some useful comments from his friend. 2018 11/06/19

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 AER:Insights - Larry Samuelson, Very polite, slightly more than standard rejection letter, saying - not a good fit, although enjoyable. Clearly he had read the paper. Please add AERi to the combo box.... 2020 03/03/20

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject after two weeks. Generic letter. Disappointing as paper got some fine ref reports in another top journal and revised. 2018 07/13/18

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 AER Insights: Generic rejection without any thought or suggestion. Doesn't seem it was read beyond the title. Thanks Amy! 2018 05/15/18

American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Desk rejected after 1 month. The response email was generic and brief, with no actual content or substance. Conveyed no sense at all that anyone even looked at the paper. Received the standard 50% fee refund (wow, so useful) 2019 10/01/19

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 within 2 weeks desk rejected by Penny Goldberg. Did get a field journal suggestion and a refund of submission fees. 2016 08/03/16

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2011 12/21/12

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 3 weeks. editor asked to AE who said "nice, but not enough". Both read, understood and gave a few comments. Sounds fair. 2016 09/19/16

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in 2 weeks, editor recommended sending the paper to a field journal. Glad that they didn't waste my time. 2017 11/15/17

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Under 2 weeks for a desk reject. Editor was very kind. Suggested a more specialized journal. Said they would refund the submission fee, which is nice. 2015 11/02/15

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected by Penny Goldberg. I suspect whether Penny Goldberg is competent. 2015 10/03/15

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 AER Insights: Form letter desk reject. 2019 06/14/19

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Generic rejection letter. 2016 10/17/16

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2011 12/20/12

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 10 days 2017 01/12/18

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 1 0 2015 04/26/16

American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Not general interest. 2015 03/07/16

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Sample size concerns. 2018 01/14/19

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 1 N/A 0 Not enough contribution 2014 05/12/14

American Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Poor justification, pure taste by Debraj Ray 2016 02/07/17

American Economic Review Desk Reject 2 2 1 Desk rejected, but after consultation with a referee who provided a mini-report. Report was fair and helpful and editor's letter was kind. 2018 05/14/19

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 Desk rejected within a week. The editor read the paper and provided useful advice on how to improve it. Suggested top field journal. 2019 06/07/19

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 1 week desk reject 2018 12/17/18

American Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected after one week with kind words from co-editor and recommended field journal 2015 08/21/15

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 1 2012 12/21/12

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 Accepted 2 3 3 2014 07/06/16

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 0 one good, one bad 2012 08/02/13

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 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 3 N/A 3 Very good and helpful referee reports even though it is a rejection. 2016 03/09/17

American Journal of Agricultural Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Referees were obviously a bad choice for this topic. Both only read half the manuscript and criticized the toy model that motivated the novel techniques in the latter half. 2016 01/17/17

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 3 N/A 3 Three high quality referee reports. Fair decision and process 2018 08/29/18

American Journal of Agricultural Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 Split decision. Two reports were reasonable and one report was very low quality. 2016 08/17/16

American Journal of Agricultural Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 2012 08/02/13

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 Journal of Health Economics Accepted 1 3 2 Highly efficient process 2016 01/14/18

American Journal of Health Economics Accepted 2 1 2 Fast, knowledgeable referees, and good comments. Highly recommended. 2016 06/17/16

American Journal of Health Economics Ref Reject 7 7 2 Worst. Journal. Ever. One extremely hostile report written by someone who is clearly trying to delay my results from coming out and another one paragraph report recommending minor revisions. The editor did not read the paper and just sided with the hostile referee. This journal is a joke. They will delay and reject any papers on topics that someone at Duke also works on. 2017 12/09/17

American Journal of Health Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Horrible reports. It seems like one of the reviewers do not even read my paper.The suggestions are nonsense. 2018 05/17/18

American Journal of Health Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Failed to notify me of rejection. Found out it was rejected only by contacting them. 2016 12/14/16

American Journal of Health Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Referees mixed. Low quality comments from Frank Sloan. 2016 05/17/17

American Journal of Health Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Says 6 week turnaround but took about 4 months. Decent referee reports. 2018 04/07/19

American Law and Economics Review Accepted 3 1 2 Very pleasant experience. The editor was quick and helpful. 2014 12/31/16

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 Law and Economics Review Ref Reject 10 N/A 2 A very long time. But two useful reports 2019 07/02/20

American Law and Economics Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Horrible experience. The editor said the paper was too similar to another paper, which was not published and cannot be found online. Will never submit here. 2015 10/31/15

American Political Science Review Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 2005 08/02/13

American Political Science Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Rejected for not have a theoretical contribution. 2017 11/19/17

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 Accepted 3 3 1 Smooth process. 2017 11/07/17

Annals of Finance Ref Reject 2 2 2 Rejected but with excellent reports. The journal is higher than B 2015 08/01/17

Annals of Finance Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 one good, one bad 2012 01/14/13

Annals of Finance Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 rejected for small contribution 2016 08/01/17

Annals of Regional Science Pending 0 N/A 0 Hard to believe. Inquired about my submission after 7 months, got answer that revision time "totally depends on the reviewers". Withdrew paper after one year without signs of life. Was contacted again after another two years promising that my paper was to be considered, and say yes please do. Lastly withdrew for good after another six months. all in all four years without ever seeing a referee report. 2014 08/20/18

Annals of Regional Science Accepted 6 1 2 2016 02/01/17

Annals of Regional Science Accepted 5 5 2 Excellent referee reports (equivalent to JUE) and great editor (J.E. Kohlhase) 2013 01/06/16

Annals of Regional Science Accepted 4 3 2 2016 01/26/18

Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy Accepted 5 1 2 2013 10/09/13

Applied Economics Pending 12 N/A 1 R&R after almost one year...too slow...poor report...but with a good result... 2017 04/03/18

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 2 1 1 Received first reply after 7 weeks. One synthetic but straight to the point referee report, asking for very specific and reasonable corrections to the paper. I did what was asked, and the revised paper was accepted by the editor after one week. Incredibly fast review process, on this occasion. 2019 02/11/20

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 6 3 1 It took too long, I do not know if I would submit there again. 2018 04/14/19

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 1 2 Accepted 3 days after resub even though the initial decision was RR with 'major revisions' 2016 07/05/16

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 7 1 2 The editor Mark Taylor accepted the paper after one day of the last re-submission. Very fast experience at last 2015 10/06/16

Applied Economics Accepted 5 N/A 1 Decent referee report, acceptance 3 days after submitting revision 2019 02/11/20

Applied Economics Accepted 2 1 1 My first submission in AE and it is the best experience ever. Editor Prof. David Peel is a very nice guy. 2018 08/25/18

Applied Economics Accepted 6 1 2 Excellent Experience. The referee reports were good. 2016 04/06/17

Applied Economics Accepted 12 1 1 The revision was accepted one week after resubmission. Good. But first response took a whole year. 2017 04/18/18

Applied Economics Accepted 4 2 1 Great experience. A good referee report and very efficient editor. 2013 07/16/14

Applied Economics Accepted 4 1 2 2014 10/16/14

Applied Economics Accepted 4 3 2 good experience 2018 10/16/19

Applied Economics Accepted 3 1 1 Fairly quick acceptance. happy with outcome. 2019 07/13/19

Applied Economics Accepted 3 1 1 Very different than my past experience. Applied Economics was usually getting back to me in 6 months or even more, this time I had great experience. Very efficient and fast. 2017 02/07/18

Applied Economics Accepted 2 1 1 2 months to R&R, revisions accepted by editor about a week after re-submission. Good experience 2017 02/19/18

Applied Economics Accepted 8 1 2 Revision accepted by editor within two days after re-submission. Good experience 2017 04/29/18

Applied Economics Accepted 0 N/A 0 10 days, very efficient, nice editor 2013 04/22/13

Applied Economics Accepted 4 2 2 2014 06/04/15

Applied Economics Accepted 11 1 1 Very long time to receive the first decision (major revision). Only one referee report in 11 months? Comments were quite simple, I resubmitted after one month, and the editor accepted the paper after 40 days. 2017 09/12/18

Applied Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Rubbish and incorrect comments by one reviewer. The reviewer didn't even bother to read after page 8. 2017 10/08/17

Applied Economics Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Meaningless reviews. We resubmitted to AEPP and the paper received minor revisions after the second R&R 2016 08/18/17

Applied Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 Our paper is rejected after receiving one referee report. The report is rubbish and incorrect. I will never submit these bullshits to the editor who trusts me. It's time for the journal to kick out some unprofessional referees. 2018 06/15/19

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 6 N/A 0 No feedback from handling editor, No refund. 2019 06/22/20

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 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected in a week. 2012 02/01/13

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 Letters Accepted 8 N/A 0 Accepted as it is. Too long waiting time. 2016 06/20/17

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 2 1 1 Relatively high submission fee. Good helpful report asking for few corrections. Revision accepted three hours after submission. 2015 02/09/16

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 1 1 1 very fast! 2017 10/20/17

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 2 N/A 0 2015 09/28/15

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 3 1 1 2016 01/24/17

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 1 N/A 0 Smooth process. 2016 12/02/16

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 8 1 1 2017 07/03/18

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 2 N/A 0 Pleasant first publication experience. Lots of minor standardized formating requests, then a gap of 10 weeks to get accepted. 6 months after that paper online. 2018 12/04/18

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 3 1 1 2016 01/24/17

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 0 N/A 0 Got accepted after a week. Great experience. 2016 12/07/16

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 4 N/A 0 Accepted, no referee reports. Desk accept? 2016 06/02/16

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 0 N/A 0 Got accepted after a week. Great experience. 2016 12/07/16

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 Accepted 4 N/A 0 Accepted without need for further revisions. 2016 11/29/17

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 2 N/A 0 No referee reports, just got notified I was accepted. Very smooth process. 2015 10/07/15

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 3 N/A 1 Single ref report had three very minor questions. I sent off the revision less than 24 hours after the R&R. Paper was accepted two days later. Easiest publication of my life! 3 months was a little long to wait, though. 2018 05/04/18

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 0 N/A 0 Accepted after two weeks 2010 07/26/13

Applied Economics Letters Accepted 9 N/A 0 Very different experience from the first time. Took 9 months for acceptance. 2017 03/28/18

Applied Economics Letters Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Unfathomably long time to first decision, referee comments impleid the paper was not read diligently, despite being just 4-5 pages. Reviewer comments not helpful and very difficult to understand 2019 06/16/19

Applied Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 The referee report was more appropriate for R&R. The (anonymous) editor rejected the paper without reading it. Bad experience. 2017 04/09/18

Applied Economics Letters Ref Reject 3 N/A 0 Not clear if I waited 3 months for a desk a reject or a referee reject.... The lack of referee reports makes me think it is the latter. Which....a 3 month wait on with an expense submission fee for desk reject. 2015 10/28/15

Applied Economics Letters Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 3 months for one nonsense report 2018 12/28/18

Applied Economics Letters Ref Reject 6 N/A 1 meaningless 2016 03/23/17

Applied Economics Letters Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 One line "referee report". Argued lack of fit, dispite publishing a paper on the subject a few months ago 2017 11/07/17

Applied Economics Letters Ref Reject 7 N/A 1 one very short useless report in seven months 2018 12/27/18

Applied Economics Letters Ref Reject 5 N/A 0 5 months + 125USD for a referee rejection with a report of about 21 lines....SHAME 2017 12/27/17

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 Economics Letters Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Referee comments show that it could be an RR but the editor rejected. Based on the large volume of submissions we receive... bla bla 2019 06/26/19

Applied Economics Letters Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Actually submitted in 2017 (wiki not updated yet). 6 weeks for a desk reject w/o any explanation. 2016 05/08/17

Applied Economics Letters Desk Reject 6 N/A 0 Desk rejected after more than 6 months without any review or comments. Massive waste of time and money. 2019 06/30/20

Applied Economics Quarterly Accepted 4 6 2 2011 03/07/18

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 8 1 1 After r&r, accepted in 2 days 2012 10/16/13

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 Ref Reject 8 N/A 1 half a page report. super slow for what they give. 2018 03/18/18

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Pending 2 N/A 2 Pretty fast, 1 high quailty report. Working on my R&R now. 2017 05/26/17

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Accepted 4 2 2 Good experience 2016 12/09/16

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Accepted 2 2 2 Good experience. 2 constructive reports that improve the paper after 2 months. May have a good chance at a higher ranked outlet but if considered speed and diversification then it was a good and correct decision to submit here. 2018 06/06/19

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Accepted 2 2 1 Very fast decisions. Two rounds of review. 2019 07/06/20

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Accepted 10 2 1 Took a while, but great experience overall. Ref report definitely helpful 2018 12/22/19

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Accepted 6 2 1 Very efficiently run journal (at least my experience). Referee report was reasonable and improved the paper. 2018 11/05/18

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 Accepted 5 3 3 2011 01/11/17

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Accepted 1 2 1 very fast response and useful comments from a referee 2014 11/06/17

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 superfast with 2 reports. 2020 07/30/20

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 I regret to inform you that we do not consider this work to be of sufficient interest to our readership to warrant publication. Could've desk-rejected instead of two useless referee reports. 2017 04/11/18

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 9 N/A 1 extremely slow. useless report from "expert" regurgitating my explicitly stated caveats 2016 05/30/17

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 Unfortunately paper was assigned to handling editor who was on study leave. When we chased, we received detailed referee reports and R&R quickly, but were given just 2 weeks to make massive changes to the paper - we withdrew and used comments to publish elsewhere 2017 06/16/19

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 2 N/A 0 Empty report. Do not send a paper to BE JM 2019 10/28/19

B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics Ref Reject 5 N/A 1 Very bad experience. 5 months for one low-quality referee report 2018 05/29/19

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 Pending 3 N/A 2 Good reports 2015 02/05/16

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Pending 2 N/A 0 2019 04/26/19

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Pending 3 N/A 2 Good reports 2015 02/05/16

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Accepted 3 1 2 2016 09/09/16

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Accepted 1 2 1 Very efficient process. Received 1st response within a month with a very helpful referee report. After that Editor took 2 months to answer positively to my R&R. Overall, it was a smooth process. 2016 02/21/17

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Accepted 2 4 2 Very high quality referee reports and suggestions for improvement the manuscript 2019 06/16/20

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Accepted 6 1 1 The first response took more than I expected, but the referee's comment was very constructive. 2018 02/06/19

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Accepted 3 3 1 Reasonably good experience; referee not overly experienced with topic. Editor handled the paper well. 2019 02/16/20

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Accepted 4 2 2 2015 07/15/16

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Accepted 3 1 2 2 straightforward reports with fair criticism. Accepted after revision within 1 month. Very clear and good process. 2015 08/31/15

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 Bad process. Four months for one sloppy report full of referee noise. Nothing substantial to improve the paper. Avoid this shitty journal. 2016 11/06/16

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 After 4 months it remained Under review and these comments I get from the Reviewer: "You have a good idea. However, it would probably help to read some of Joanna Lahey's work to get a sense of the state-of-art methods with these audit studies." Funny thing is Editor endorsed reviewer's response. 2017 03/12/18

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 Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 Though it is rejcted, I want to express my thankness to the refreee, who provdes a exremly high quality report 2017 12/22/17

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 Only one report. From the comments it could have been an R&R, at least the referee and editor comments were helpful and will help to improve the paper 2020 06/02/20

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 Contrary to my earlier belief, this journal does not give you a quick outcome. Or rather, the editor is very lazy to follow up on the reports. One report was very positive, but the second one looked like it was written in ten minutes citing four papers of his own. Really unprofessional. 2016 08/18/16

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 2011 01/11/13

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Useless referee report and incompetent editor wasted whole three months of waiting. Look elsewhere if you want to have a decent submission experience. 2015 06/09/16

B.E. Journals in Economic Analysis & Policy Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 I want to express my thankness to a refreee, who provded an exremly high quality report 2017 12/23/17

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

BE Journal of Theoretical Economics Accepted 7 6 3 Referees asked for reasonable stuff. Made some changes, argued against other changes, got accepted. 2014 10/15/15

BE Journal of Theoretical Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Bad reports! Nothing constructive. 2015 09/22/15

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

British Journal of Industrial Relations Accepted 5 4 2 Quite poor reviews (not helpful) so Editor gave lots of helpful guidance. Think I got lucky. 2014 05/03/16

British Journal of Industrial Relations Accepted 5 2 2 2015 12/10/15

British Journal of Industrial Relations Accepted 3 3 2 Overall efficient and fair but demanding process. Tough reports that required a lot of work but ultimately improved the paper significantly. 2018 11/10/18

British Journal of Industrial Relations Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk rejected, one sentence given. It appears they don't like overly technical papers (it's an interdisciplinary journal so depends on who the editor is at the time - if not an economist, then avoid) 2015 05/03/16

Bulletin of Economic Research Pending 0 N/A 0 Had to withdraw after ten months of waiting. Terribly run journal and I wouldn't advise anyone to submit there. 2017 10/20/17

Bulletin of Economic Research Pending 10 N/A 0 It's been 10 months and still waiting for a first response of a short paper 2017 10/04/17

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 Accepted 8 2 2 Francis Breedon is an efficient editor. The paper was accepted after one round of submission. 2014 10/06/16

Bulletin of Economic Research Accepted 15 9 2 2016 04/26/18

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

Bulletin of Economic Research Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 2013 03/19/14

Bulletin of Economic Research Ref Reject 13 N/A 2 Mediocre reports. Absurd long process 2014 08/05/15

Bulletin of Economic Research Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 A bit long for a short paper, comments were fair and detailed although they pointed the way to an R&R rather than rejection. Good quality reports for a low-ranked journal, though. 2016 08/25/16

Bulletin of Economic Research Desk Reject 13 N/A 0 That's right. It too me the editor 13 months to desk reject. In the meantime they lied to me saying that it was out for review and that they were awaiting referee scores. The journal is a joke! 2014 02/08/16

Bulletin of Economic Research Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 For a short paper, it took quite a longtime for deskreject without a single sentence relating to the paper. 2016 10/25/16

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 Accepted 7 3 1 My paper was a comment, so I consider this pretty slow. Comments were not really helpful. 2018 11/25/19

Cambridge Journal of Economics Accepted 5 5 1 Professional co-editor and referee. Would try again in the future. 2016 05/04/18

Cambridge Journal of Economics Accepted 5 5 1 Professional co-editor and referee. Would try again in the future. 2016 05/04/18

Cambridge Journal of Economics Accepted 6 5 3 Very tough journal with very extensive comments from 3 refs. Went from reject/resubmit to revise resubmit 1, revise resubmit 2, finally accepted. All queries tough but manageable - only difficulty was having 3 refs say sometimes contradictory things. Otherwise, great experience. Would submit here again. 2016 10/27/17

Cambridge Journal of Economics Accepted 5 5 1 Professional co-editor and referee. Would try again in the future. 2016 05/04/18

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

Cambridge Journal of Economics Ref Reject 10 N/A 2 Reports were ok but nothing special, especially given the time that has passed... Contacting the editor twice did not result in speeding up the process (but we received at least a reply). 2016 08/09/17

Cambridge Journal of Economics Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Rejected after 2 weeks. Said the paper was to mathematical/econometrical for the journal. The paper was triying to test unit roots on capacity utilisation for a cross-section of countries to test some macro models; so it did stuff that even a Master's can understand. 2019 12/10/19

Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics Accepted 6 5 2 2014 02/12/16

Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics Desk Reject 1 1 0 My paper was much of empirical. The editor emailed me after 6 days and said he read and liked the paper. And some more nice words. However, he said they cannot consider the paper for publication because it is not about Canada. And because he could not find theoretical contributions. Overall, not bad experience. 2017 08/03/17

Canadian Journal of Economics Accepted 5 5 1 Would submit again. CJE is recovering. 2016 05/04/18

Canadian Journal of Economics Accepted 5 3 2 Very good experience, competent referees and quick feedback after the resubmission. 2017 08/20/18

Canadian Journal of Economics Accepted 6 6 2 Very helpful an detailed comments. 2016 01/29/19

Canadian Journal of Economics Accepted 5 3 2 Constructive comments and Nice experimence! 2017 10/20/18

Canadian Journal of Economics Accepted 4 4 3 Very good experience. Strongly recommend submitting there. 2017 05/14/18

Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 1 N/A 1 The editor and referee claimed the results were nice but hardly adoptable to other more general problems.... they suggested a more spezialized on topic journal. all in all, a costly but friendly and competent experience 2016 03/11/17

Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 I urged the editor to give me reports 3 months after the initial submission. Decent reports, no complain. 2015 02/09/16

Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Poor reports 2013 08/06/15

Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 12/20/12

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 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 5 N/A 1 One negative report only after 5 months, but editor tried to get a second one within a couple of weeks. Finally rejected because contribution is too specific. Disappointing outcome, but OK overall experience 2016 06/02/17

Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Very good referee reports. 2014 05/07/15

Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 2 N/A 1 2018 02/05/19

Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2015 10/05/16

Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Bad report, condescending. Referee cites one crucial assumption to kill the paper, but the paper does not make that assumption, and clearly explains it. Editor does not even both to check referee letter. 2018 04/06/19

Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Two fair reports. 2014 01/24/15

Canadian Journal of Economics Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 2011 01/19/13

Canadian Journal of Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject with what appeared to be constructive comments but on closer inspection were worthless (points already made in the paper). Kicker: next day got an email to renew my CEA membership to be able to keep submitting to CJE! 2018 10/26/18

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 1 2 2014 08/22/14

China Economic Review Pending 2 N/A 1 very quick 2014 02/20/14

China Economic Review Pending 1 N/A 2 Very quick. R&R. Two reports are ok. 2016 10/20/16

China Economic Review Accepted 2 1 1 2014 04/21/14

China Economic Review Accepted 1 1 3 get first response in 28 days. Good report. Amazing efficiency. 2016 06/10/16

China Economic Review Accepted 6 3 2 2015 03/23/17

China Economic Review Accepted 6 1 2 2019 12/22/19

China Economic Review Accepted 4 2 2 Good reports. Quick responds. Awesome experience. 2014 10/23/14

China Economic Review Accepted 6 1 2 2019 12/22/19

China Economic Review Accepted 2 1 1 very efficient process 2014 06/04/15

China Economic Review Accepted 5 3 2 Very efficient process. One report was very constructive and helped improve the qualitiy of the paper. Editor was also very helpful. 2019 11/27/19

China Economic Review Accepted 2 1 2 2014 09/11/14

China Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/20/12

China Economic Review Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Rejected as "Given the poor quality of provincial GDP statistics, CER has decided not to publish papers based on provincial GDP data for now until the true data series at the provincial level are reconstructed" but they are still publishing with this data see for instance Lv, Liu, and Li 2020 Fiscal incentives, competition, and investment in China 2019 03/04/20

China Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/27/12

China Economic Review Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 12/25/12

Computational Economics Accepted 6 1 1 2009 01/04/13

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 5 1 1 Very high quality referee report. Reasonable requestsfor the R&R. Quickly accepted after the revisions were completed. Very pleasant experience. 2014 02/22/18

Computational Economics Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 Took 3 month for a simple "out of scope" notification!! 2015 06/10/15

Computational Statistics and Data Analysis Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Report from Reviewer 1 is not given. Receive reports from Reviewer 2 and Reviewer 3. Most horrible and bizarre referee reports. Ex: CDF was derived to construct the likelihood of a discrete choice model, a reviewer writes the author does not use the derived CDF. Will never submit to this journal again. Stay away! 2017 09/22/17

Contemporary Accounting Research Ref Reject 2 2 2 Very mixed report quality. One felt like it was literally written 30 minutes before the deadline. The referee acted as if I didn't cite and discuss papers mentioned in the report. The other was much more careful. The referee checked my citations and offered helpful comments. 2015 01/12/16

Contemporary Economic Policy Pending 7 4 3 Weak editor. One good referee, one ok, one terrible. Terrible referee did not understand LATE and simply could not be satisfied. Took 3 rounds for editor to realize terrible referee was a crackpot. Will not submit again. 2016 07/13/18

Contemporary Economic Policy Accepted 3 3 1 Outstanding referee reports. 2011 01/26/13

Contemporary Economic Policy Accepted 3 2 2 Super fast and clear feedback. I really appreciated the clarity the editor provided in helping to navigate the referee reports. In really sped things up. 2016 10/31/17

Contemporary Economic Policy Accepted 2 2 2 Very good clarification and additional comments from Associate Editor 2012 10/11/14

Contemporary Economic Policy Accepted 4 3 1 The reviewer was excellent, made the paper much better with his/her comments. Excellent handling. 2014 03/22/17

Contemporary Economic Policy Ref Reject 8 N/A 2 Terrible referees. Empirical results didn't match their political priors so recommended rejection. 2016 07/13/18

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

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 3 N/A 2 First report was helpful, second one was literally 2 lines. Editor didn't pay any attention to the reports. Extremely poor experience 2015 01/15/16

Contemporary Economic Policy Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 Extremely poor experience for a journal charging submission fees. It took 5 months to get 2 rushed reports of one and a half paragraphs that show both econometric inaptitude and selective reading. A grad student could do better! 2016 07/15/16

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

Decisions in Economics and Finance Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 fast desk rejection within 2 days. Associate editor thinks that DEAF is JFE. I wish them luck. 2016 07/09/16

Defence and Peace Economics Pending 0 N/A 0 Editor sent it to peer review in one day. Fast and very polite response. 2016 07/09/16

Defence and Peace Economics Accepted 4 1 2 very good communication with the editor 2015 06/07/15

Defence and Peace Economics Accepted 3 3 1 Good communication with the editor, very helpful referee report 2012 12/05/13

Demography Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 Two horribly low quality reports. Neither of the two reviewers seemed t have read the paper. Each report was one small paragraph long. Horrible experience, and it is not even that good a journal! 2015 05/06/16

Demography Ref Reject 6 8 3 Perhaps the worst experience ever. Some reviewers disappeared after the first review, the editors could't even find an alternative, and the comments were not assessed critically by the editors due to an editorial change. The former editors at the penn state just issued reject to relieve their editorial jobs. 2018 12/08/19

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

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 rejected within 7 days. Editor wrote a few short comments. 2018 03/19/18

Development and Change Pending 36 12 0 Under editor's evaluation for almost 2 months. withdrew the paper after contacting the journal twice 2018 12/16/18

Development and Change Pending 0 N/A 0 2 months, the article is still under internal review... 2015 03/13/15

Development Policy Review Pending 12 N/A 0 DPR had my manuscript for over a year, and never even got it under review. I inquired a few times, and they responded promptly and politely, but sitting on a manuscript for a year is obviously unacceptable. I withdrew the manuscript and will never submit here again. Awful experience. 2017 05/07/18

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 2 2 2 Very thorough and professional 2018 11/29/18

Eastern European Economics Accepted 3 3 0 The article was accepted by the referees 2007 09/07/14

Ecological Economics Accepted 2 1 2 Useful and interesting comments 2016 03/24/17

Ecological Economics Accepted 3 1 2 journal has a reputation for being out of the mainstream of econ. but i think it is an important one that should be considered a bonafide econ journal. it has papers by good authors, like Kenneth Arrow. it has qualitative stuff, which i do not think should be considered non-economic. 2014 11/27/16

Ecological Economics Accepted 2 4 4 2009 01/09/13

Ecological Economics Accepted 4 N/A 1 Useful and encouraging comments from referees, who appeared very interested in improving the paper and offering helpful suggestions to do so. 2016 02/07/17

Ecological Economics Accepted 4 4 3 Detailed and useful referee reports 2010 01/22/13

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 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 12 N/A 1 2010 12/20/12

Ecological Economics Ref Reject 5 3 3 Rejected after first re-submission, too demanding referees 2012 04/16/13

Ecological Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 1 Received desk rejection from one of the editors quoting results completely unrelated to my paper. This editor must have not bothered to read my paper or mistook it for another one. I contacted the journal about that but no response. I am very surprised by this unprofessional oversight. Admittedly, they must receive a lot of submissions, but that does not excuse this. 2016 11/19/16

Ecological Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject in 3 days. 2018 04/17/18

Ecological Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Desk reject after 2 days 2020 06/13/20

Ecological Economics Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 Desk rejected with 1 sentence after 2 months. I have the feeling that the editor did not read the paper!!! 2016 03/01/17

Ecological Economics Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 The editor informed us that the contribution of the paper was not high enough for this journal although the topic has been examined in the past by other papers in this Journal 2016 10/05/16

Econometric Reviews Pending 0 N/A 0 Horrible! Two weeks and they not assigned a manuscript ID number. 2017 09/22/17

Econometric Reviews Accepted 9 8 4 two years is a bit too long, especially given that it will take more than a year before the paper appears in the journal 2013 11/16/15

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 10 N/A 2 2 mildly useful reports. one referee pointed to their own working paper which is still not published (jan 2017) 2015 01/14/17

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 Reviews Ref Reject 4 1 2 2015 08/13/15

Econometric Reviews Ref Reject 7 N/A 1 Overall experience is horrible. Took 7 months to give 1 referee report with just 5 lines. Will never submit again to ER. Stay away! 2017 04/05/18

Econometric Theory Ref Reject 12 N/A 1 Reminded several times and after waiting 1 year got one referee report. Summary understated contribution of the paper making it looking boring. Rejection based on technical point, which could be fixed withing 2 weeks. Very poor experience. 2015 06/07/17

Econometric Theory Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 very good reports 2013 03/18/14

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 Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 No arguments were provided 2017 07/17/17

Econometric Theory Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Fast desk reject. No specfic comment on the paper. 2018 01/28/19

Econometrica Accepted 3 3 4 2017 04/27/18

Econometrica Accepted 4 4 3 2008 11/17/13

Econometrica Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Two very helpful reports and encouraging letter from AE 2012 03/05/13

Econometrica Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Low-quality reports, waste of time. 2015 03/07/16

Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 One was thoughtful report, pointed to at least one direction we can improve. Second was uninformative. 2018 05/13/19

Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 2016 12/26/16

Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 2018 12/17/18

Econometrica Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 2010 01/11/13

Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Shockingly low quality reports that were nearly identical. Good for knowing what people didn't like, but not clear how to improve. 2016 09/10/16

Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Good reports, not extremely helpful, but good 2015 05/26/15

Econometrica Ref Reject 5 N/A 2 reports not very insightful 2012 01/25/13

Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Three referee reports. One obviously senior who doesn't care, openly says didn't read some parts. Other two reports are fine, although one other also did not read a section, s/he says. All suggest major revision and change of approach. The senior is useless as s/he was not happy that the paper is against an established theory. 2017 07/13/18

Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 4 Detailed and constructive comments that were spot on from the editor. Result not general enough for ECMA. Referees all showed an understanding of the paper and suggestions were useful. 2017 02/27/18

Econometrica Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 2012 12/20/12

Econometrica Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 very good referee comments 2013 12/31/14

Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2012 12/28/12

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 3 N/A 5 2018 07/23/18

Econometrica Ref Reject 6 N/A 3 2013 11/01/13

Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 The rejection was fair but the referee report uninformative and boilerplate. 2017 09/23/18

Econometrica Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 good referee reports 2012 05/03/13

Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 no negative comments, just say that the contribution is not big enough for Econometrica, which is completely understandable. 2009 10/04/15

Econometrica Ref Reject 5 N/A 3 3 good ref reports 2015 09/13/15

Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 Quick, very good feedback. Did not make the cut unfortunately, but will submit there again. No regrets 2018 05/14/18

Econometrica Ref Reject 2 N/A 3 2017 02/28/18

Econometrica Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 All three referees are weak on maths 2014 02/11/15

Econometrica Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Two reports are suggestive but the other one was a low-quality. It seems that the last guy didn't read the paper carefully and I wonder how it could take 4month to write such a poor report. 2017 09/10/17

Econometrica Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Fully ignorant referees 2014 02/11/15

Econometrica Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2012 06/03/13

Econometrica Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Some comments from the editor, some are useful. 2019 02/18/19

Econometrica Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Fair decision. Useful letter from the editor. 2014 04/30/15

Econometrica Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Paper too good for their journal. Recommend trying better journal. 2015 10/19/15

Econometrica Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2013 02/15/13

Econometrica Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 quick (7 days) desk reject 2017 07/10/17

Econometrica Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 two weeks. desk with a letter from editor. he clearly read the paper. comments were not very insoghtful, but decision & process overall fair. 2018 01/14/19

Econometrica Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 desk reject with very short referee note 2014 12/22/14

Econometrics Journal Ref Reject 1 1 2 A complete discrage. Pathetic referee reports. Stay away from this journal if you do not have a connection from inside. Just stay away! 2018 07/24/18

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 2015 08/13/15

Econometrics Journal Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 2014 11/06/14

Economic Development and Cultural Change Pending 6 N/A 0 My paper has been under the status "with editor" after submission for almost one half year, and I have decided to withdraw the paper 2017 08/01/17

Economic Development and Cultural Change Accepted 12 12 2 Very long process. Apparently the assigned coeditor left and paper got stuck. But very quick process after contacting editorial office. 2012 07/24/16

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 Accepted 7 7 1 Had to email them to speed up the revision process. Minor changes, though. Cool editor. 2014 08/16/15

Economic Development and Cultural Change Accepted 3 1 2 2017 09/10/19

Economic Development and Cultural Change Accepted 5 4 2 Excellent experience, the editor was clear on what is required after first round RR. Accepted once I satisfied the referees. Excellent referees too, no nitpicking, focused on contribution. 2018 02/10/19

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 3 N/A 3 2016 12/09/17

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 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 2 N/A 2 2018 06/06/18

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 6 N/A 3 2012 04/16/13

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 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 0 N/A 0 Mentioned that they do not consider theoretical papers. Duh 2013 07/13/13

Economic Development and Cultural Change Desk Reject 0 N/A 0 Very helpful response from editor giving specific reasons that the manuscript would not be sent to referees 2019 07/22/19

Economic Development and Cultural Change Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Very polite editor. 2014 03/05/14

Economic History Review Accepted 3 5 3 2014 01/27/16

Economic History Review Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 1 of 3 referee reports was helpful 2019 04/04/20

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 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 Accepted 2 N/A 3 Very quick and extremely professional. Will submit there in the future. 2018 11/20/18

Economic Inquiry Accepted 9 4 3 two good reports and one short report 2015 10/04/16

Economic Inquiry Accepted 12 4 2 2011 12/24/12

Economic Inquiry Accepted 14 10 3 It is the worst experience I have ever had with a journal. Outcome was positive in the end, but I had to follow some nonsense instructions from the referees and the editor. I will never submit there again 2014 08/11/16

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 3 1 3 Excellent and constructive reports. Efficient process and fast decision 2019 08/23/20

Economic Inquiry Accepted 4 5 2 2008 12/21/12

Economic Inquiry Accepted 2 N/A 2 superfast handling 2013 05/29/14

Economic Inquiry Accepted 2 N/A 2 very efficient 2013 06/19/13

Economic Inquiry Accepted 3 3 2 Very useful referee reports. Professional editor. 2012 11/20/14

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 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 3 N/A 1 2014 04/22/14

Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 14 N/A 0 took more than 1 year to get one referee report. AVOID it 2016 01/15/18

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 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 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 4 N/A 2 2010 01/02/13

Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 6 N/A 2 Under review, it gets assigned to Co-editor Brennan. No progress in six months although I send emails to push. Main editor Wilson takes care of it. Two month later it is rejected and get two referee reports (fair enough there). Not a good experience. Wilson inform me, on average, EI first decision is in 67 days, but my six months delay is not due to neglect (YEAH RIGHT! FYI: Your editor sucks). 2017 03/16/18

Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 3 N/A 1 Only one semi-informative report. At least they are faster than their reputation. 2015 12/14/15

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 10 N/A 1 Rejected with only 1 referee reports and after waiting 10 months! Insane process and utterly inexperienced referee. Editor said he is sorry for the wait... 2015 10/08/15

Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Expensive but quick. One very good report, 6 pages long. Other referee didn't have a clue. 2018 12/08/18

Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 11 N/A 2 2 very short reports after waiting 11 months and paying a crazy submission fee. Avoid that journal 2015 12/10/15

Economic Inquiry Ref Reject 4 N/A 1 After "awaiting referee selection" for 4 months, I sent a query and got one referee report. It seems that the reviewer didn't correctly understand the setup of the model; But, some very useful comments were provided. I don't know what to add. 2018 03/09/19

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 3 N/A 1 Mediocre assessment from referee with some helpful suggestions. Editor agreed = reject. 2013 04/17/14

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 2 One excellent referee report, and one decent one. Good experience overall 2014 04/23/14

Economic Inquiry Desk Reject 3 N/A 0 desk rejected after thee months. No reason given (just lack of fit..), no suggestions to improve, no money back. Garbage 2018 03/01/19

Economic Inquiry Desk Reject 1 1 0 Unprofessional and incorrect comments by co-editor Rob Simmons. I have no problem receiving a desk-reject, but the stated reasons show no understanding of our research. This would be fine if desk-reject was motivated by "not a good fit" or such. Disappointing experience. 2015 11/18/15

Economic Inquiry Desk Reject 2 N/A 0 desk rejected after more than 2 months, very generic motivation (try a field journal), they took the submission fees and thanked me a lot for the payment! 2015 03/04/16

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 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 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 2 N/A 0 2012 12/27/12

Economic Inquiry Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 Topic is too specfic... 2015 11/08/15

Economic Inquiry Desk Reject 1 N/A 2 Desk rejection based on lack of fit, altough there were at least 4 papers published on the same topic in previous years. They keep the submission fees, very efficient cash cow! 2015 11/21/15

Economic Inquiry Desk Reject 1 N/A 0 2014 09/17/14

Economic Journal Pending 4 N/A 2 one very good report 2012 01/25/13

Economic Journal Accepted 5 1 2 2011 12/21/12

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 4 2 2 Very helpful reports 2014 01/11/17

Economic Journal Accepted 4 1 3 2012 08/02/13

Economic Journal Accepted 5 2 2 All reports were useful and very demanding 2011 03/19/13

Economic Journal Accepted 2 2 3 Helpful and competent editor who made clear what were the important points to address. Good reports. Fast turnaround, I'm very happy with the experience. 2016 08/30/17

Economic Journal Accepted 5 3 2 2014 10/04/15

Economic Journal Accepted 3 3 2 Quick process, very solid reports and editor comments. 2013 06/18/14

Economic Journal Accepted 4 5 2 good reports; excellent editor who acts like an additional referee. 2012 11/09/13

Economic Journal Ref Reject 8 N/A 3 2013 02/12/14

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 5 N/A 2 Great letter from Nezih G and two good referee reports. Rejected as contribution isn't good enough 2019 04/07/20

Economic Journal Ref Reject 8 N/A 3 Took way to long for three one page poor quality reports 2017 01/22/18

Economic Journal Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Two referees, two weak R&Rs, editor rejects despite the recommendations of referees. Quite upsetting. If editor did not like the paper, then just desk reject! 2015 02/04/16

Economic Journal Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 one so-so report and one excellent report 2013 01/23/14

Economic Journal Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 Useful and fair comments 2018 06/16/19

Economic Journal Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 2017 09/10/19

Economic Journal Ref Reject 4 N/A 2 Useless reports! 2016 08/21/16

Economic Journal Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 Took 5 months in total, 2 reports, a paragraph each. 2017 10/02/17

Economic Journal Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 Both negative, one fair, other illustrated misunderstanding of econometrics 2017 08/13/18

Economic Journal Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 One report was helpful; the other not. 2016 12/31/16

Economic Journal Ref Reject 3 N/A 4 2013 01/29/14

Economic Journal Ref Reject 4 N/A 3 3 Reports. 1 great, 1 so so, 1 absolutely trash (the referee only argued on the reliability of the benchmark case, which is a well established result in the literature!!!). High Quality Editing. Will submit again. 2016 05/25/17

Economic Journal Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 The editor had good words about the paper but one ref didn't like it, so he rejected it. Would try again. 2015 12/21/16

Economic Journal Ref Reject 1 N/A 2 Super quick process. Editor (Voth) was polite but did not say much. One report very solid and useful, another (two-paragraph one) looks confusing. 2017 03/15/18

Economic Journal Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 very useful referee reports 2012 08/02/13

Economic Journal Ref Reject 7 N/A 2 Bad experience. One decent and one sloppy report 2019 06/19/20

Economic Journal Ref Reject 3 N/A 2 2013 06/14/13

Economic Journal Ref Reject 4 N/A 0 2017 12/09/17

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 4 12 3 Bad experience 2017 02/14/19

Economic Journal Ref Reject 3 N/A 3 3 useful reports 2016 08/02/17

Economic Journal Ref Reject 2 N/A 2 One referee liked it, the other and the editor didn't. Some good comments 