Journal info (provided by editor)

% accepted last year
n/a
% immediately rejected last year
n/a
Articles published last year
n/a
Manuscripts received last year
n/a
Open access status
n/a
Manuscript handling fee
n/a

Impact factors (provided by editor)

Two-year impact factor
n/a
Five-year impact factor
n/a

Aims and scope

The editor has not yet provided this information.

Duration of manuscript handling phases

Duration first review round
n/a
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
n/a
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
Average number of review rounds
n/a
Difficulty of reviewer comments
n/a
Average number of review reports
n/a

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
n/a
Overall rating manuscript handling
3.0 / 5.0

Latest review

Overall rating: 3 (good). Outcome: Accepted (im.).

Motivation:
I would have appreciated to receive some proper 'review' (rather than a mere request to correct one typographical error), which would have improved the content of the article. It seems that ExpT don't offer this—at least in my case they didn't.