Subject Area | Rank | Percentile |
---|---|---|
Category: Engineering Subcategory: Ocean Engineering |
6 / 105 | |
Category: Engineering Subcategory: Environmental Engineering |
28 / 197 |
APC | APC Waiver | Other Charges |
---|---|---|
N/A | N/A | N/A |
Quartiles By JIF | Collection | Quartile | Rank | Percentage |
Category: ENGINEERING, CIVIL | SCIE | Q1 | 29/182 |
|
Category: ENGINEERING, OCEAN | SCIE | Q1 | 4/18 |
|
Quartiles By JCI | Collection | Quartile | Rank | Percentage |
Category: ENGINEERING, CIVIL | SCIE | Q1 | 24/182 |
|
Category: ENGINEERING, OCEAN | SCIE | Q1 | 4/18 |
|
Select your rating and start your review of COASTAL ENGINEERING
2025-04-09
What is the reason for rejection?
2025-03-17
The top journal in the field of ocean engineering and coastal engineering, without a doubt.
2025-02-26
Submitted at 5 pm in the evening, rejected at 1 am in the early morning. It's the first time encountering an editorial department rejecting so quickly, so I want to make a special comment about it.
2025-01-02
The editing process is relatively fast, with an estimated annual submission volume of 600-800 based on the manuscript number, but only about 100 submissions are accepted. Judging from the feedback, a top-notch young colleague from the European circle has been invited as a reviewer.
2024-08-04
The top journal in the field of ocean engineering and coastal engineering, without a doubt. However, it has a drawback of low publication volume and long review periods.
2024-06-21
In the past two years, I have submitted my work to CE, and the editing efficiency was very high. It was sent for review the next day (I didn't expect it to be sent for review so quickly). The review process was fast, with the first review taking half a month. One expert suggested major revisions, while another felt that there was not enough significant innovation for publication. The editors considered the reviewers' opinions and decided to give me major revisions (I am grateful to the editors, but the revisions were really difficult as the issues were very technical, and it took me over a month to make the changes and re-submit). The second review took another half a month, and I received feedback a week later. The third review took 10 days, and it only required minor revisions, which were completed and returned on the same day, and accepted the next day.
Overall, the editors and reviewers were very efficient, but the difficulty was high (basically rewriting the entire paper). I consider myself lucky this time, perhaps the editor-in-chief is more familiar with my work. Thank you!
2024-05-07
In addition, there have not been any particularly outstanding works in my research field in recent CE journals. Therefore, it is not appropriate to regard CE as the top journal or premier journal in coastal engineering solely based on its difficulty in publishing
2024-05-07
One month after submission, the feedback was received from two reviewers.
One reviewer gave vague suggestions which were difficult to follow for revisions. Finally, they mentioned that they originally wanted to recommend major revisions, but due to poorly written introduction (suspected lack of innovation), they had to reject the submission.
The other reviewer provided a 5-page attachment with detailed comments pointing out various areas for improvement (a total of 46 issues). They believed that the manuscript content was good and suitable for the journal, so they recommended major revisions.
The editor ultimately rejected the submission and invited a resubmission after revisions.
After resubmission half a month later, the review cycle took two months, and in the end:
One reviewer believed that our acceptance of the submission invitation was our rebuttal, and they exploded with wild and unfounded criticisms, deeming the manuscript not worthy at all, and strongly requesting the editor to reject it. Truly perplexing.
The other reviewer supplemented a few more questions due to their extensive comments, suggesting additional points that still needed to be addressed, along with revision suggestions.
The editor ultimately rejected the submission. It was truly exhausting, as we had diligently revised for half a month and tried our best. We resubmitted to another journal (OE).
Personally, I believe there must be reasons why CE was removed from the TOP category, even though OE was removed as well. Editors should at least carefully consider the reviewers' feedback, as some of it is truly unreasonable.
CE is not difficult because of the content, but due to some neurotic reviewers
2024-01-02
CE was kicked out of the top zone and OE was also kicked out of the top zone. Some journals have moved from the second zone to the first zone. Who do you think will be the top next year or in the years to come? Or is it the king without a crown?
2023-12-30
Department: Ocean, currently only one left in Zone 1, just promoted from Zone 2. Ocean is no longer TOP