Statistics

Journal Statistics & Workflow Transparency

At Argumenta Oeconomica, we are committed to editorial transparency, academic rigour, and providing authors with timely, constructive feedback. Below are key performance metrics for our editorial workflow, peer-review process, and international reviewer community.

1. Key Editorial Metrics at a Glance

  • Current Active Submissions*: 135

    (In submission/initial check: 27 | In peer review: 85 | In copyediting: 23)*

  • Average Speed to First Decision: 13–40 days (Historical benchmark: 25 days)

  • Editorial Selectivity: around 15–21% acceptance rate for completed cycles

  • Global Peer-Review Network: 1,254 registered reviewers across 59 countries and 6 continents

2. Annual Submission & Decision Trends (2023–2026)

Metric 2023 2024 2025 2026 (YTD)* Overall / Historical
Submissions Received 86 137 189 196 754 (86/year)
Submissions Accepted 0** 17 32 21 70 (32/year)
Submissions Published 25 29 30 17 215 (27/year)
Submissions Declined 68 104 145 165 482 (111/year)
– Desk Reject (pre-review) 49 33 7 53 142 (20/year)
– Declined After Review 19 71 138 112 340 (105/year)
Acceptance Rate 8% 21% 15% 1%*** 9%
Rejection Rate 92% 79% 85% 99%*** 64%

*Data for 2026: status as of September 1, 2026

**Metrics are understated due to the transition to a new OJS system during 2023, which did not migrate historical data from the previous platform.

***The metric for the current year (YTD) is provisional, as a substantial number of manuscripts (85) are currently undergoing peer review.j.

3. Editorial Processing Times (Turnaround Times)

Timeframe / Metric 2023 2024 2025 2026 (YTD) All-Time Median
Days to First Editorial Decision 26 days 18 days 13 days 40 days 25 days
Days to Final Rejection 26 days 63 days 132 days 60 days 62 days
Days to Acceptance (Full Cycle) 685 days 401 days 343 days 111 days 432 days

Editorial Note: Through workflow optimizations, time to acceptance was cut from 400+ days in 2024 to ca. 110–340 days in recent reporting periods, while upholding strict double-blind peer review.

4. Reviewer Community & Geographic Diversity

The high academic standard of our publications is sustained by a global network of 1,254 expert reviewers from 59 countries.

  • Domestic Reviewers (Poland): 897 (71.5%)

  • International Reviewers: 357 (28.5%) from 58 countries

Reviewers by Country / Geographic Breakdown:

  • Poland: 897

  • Top International Contributions (10+ reviewers):

    China (71), Türkiye (30), Indonesia (29), India (25), United Kingdom (17), Pakistan (16), Romania (16), Malaysia (14), Spain (10), Serbia (10)

  • 5–9 Reviewers:

    Republic of Korea (9), United States (8), Ukraine (7), Nigeria (7), Taiwan (5), Czechia (5), Iran (5)

  • 3–4 Reviewers:

    Germany (4), Belgium (4), Australia (4), Slovakia (3), Switzerland (3), South Africa (3), Netherlands (3), France (3), Lithuania (3), Cyprus (3)

  • 1–2 Reviewers:

    Algeria, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Canada, Chile, Ecuador, Greece, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, New Zealand, Oman, Palestine, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovenia, Sweden, Tanzania, Thailand, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Viet Nam.