Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
3.0 weeks
4.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
2023
n/a
n/a
15 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2021
Motivation: The immediate rejection took 2 weeks
3.7 weeks
5.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
2
4
Accepted
2021
6.7 weeks
12.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
3
4
Accepted
2021
Motivation: Unlike with some other publications, the editor actually gave useful & helpful input and made informed decisions particularly in first round of review. Unfortunate process glitch lead to entirely unnecessary third revision round and thus a few weeks delay, however (resubmit with zero changes). After two recent poor experiences, I was positively surprised by ACS copyediting.
4.3 weeks
8.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
5
Accepted
2019
Motivation: The time of submission to first review is approx. 1 month. Second revision reviews might come in approx. a month after submission. Final decision comes in a few weeks time. Overall, the quality of review is excellent. Definitely helps improving the paper.
0.6 weeks
0.6 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
3
Rejected
2020
Motivation: I received three comments and the editor’s rejection decision. The comments of the two reviews are very positive. One is direct publishing. The third comment suggested, "do not publish". The third reviewer's report was wrong and ignorant, but the editor accepted his/her suggestion despite my appeal.
3.7 weeks
3.7 weeks
n/a
4 reports
3
4
Rejected
2020
Motivation: Handling was quick. I received four reviews with the decision to reject the manuscript. Two reviews were very positive. The third review seemed neutral, but in conclusion, the reviewer suggested do not publish our work. The fourth review was overly destructive. The reviewer was rather out of the field. His / her report was simply wrong and ignorant.
6.0 weeks
6.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
4
Accepted
2020
Motivation: Reviewers comments recieved within ~ 6 weeks. Very kind reviewers comments with only slight editorial changes. However, took a while to process slight editorial changes, edits to proofs and open access. There is no way to check if your paper has made it passed the editorial stage prior to reviewers comments.
6.4 weeks
9.6 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
5
Accepted
2019
n/a
n/a
11 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2019
n/a
n/a
5 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2019
Motivation: The editor suggested transferring the manuscript to the sister's journal (ACS Applied Electronic Materials).
3.6 weeks
5.6 weeks
n/a
3 reports
3
4
Rejected
2019
n/a
n/a
6 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2019
Motivation: The manuscript was suggested to be published in a more specialized journal.
6.4 weeks
8.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
2018
2.7 weeks
2.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
2016
n/a
n/a
8 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2017
4.6 weeks
6.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
2017
7.3 weeks
9.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
2017
Motivation: The process for this manuscript took slightly longer than what we've experienced earlier and expected, but all in all we have no complaints. The reviews were to the point and the communications with the editorial office were fast and smooth.
6.7 weeks
8.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
2017
5.0 weeks
5.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
2015
Motivation: The process was satisfactory in practically all ways; our only major issue with the ACS system is that it is quite prone to browser errors and after the manuscript has been submitted, the only status visible is "Submitted to Editorial Office" independent of whether it is being assessed by the editor or the reviewers.
8.3 weeks
8.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
5
Accepted
2017
Motivation: I am a great fan of how quickly everything was handled by ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces. My only beef with the ACS system is that there is no feedback on whether your manuscript is still with the editor or under review.
n/a
n/a
3 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2016
4.3 weeks
5.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
2015