The boss is a member of the editorial board and submitted two papers this year. The first paper was rejected after being submitted to JACS and PNAS, so it was resubmitted to this journal without being reviewed. The second paper was rejected after the first review by NC, so it was resubmitted to Science Bulletin, where it was reviewed and sent to four reviewers for the first review, which took three weeks. The second review took seven weeks for some reason, but it was eventually accepted. In the field of electrocatalysis, the quality of the articles should be similar to those of JACS and Angew, or slightly lower.

(0) 讚！ | 稍远

It has been two weeks since submission and it has been under consideration the whole time. I'm wondering if this journal usually takes so long to process submissions? What is the next step after under consideration?

(0) 讚！ | 自律达人

May I ask how long it takes for review? My application has been under consideration for 1 week, I'm afraid it will be rejected soon.

(0) 讚！ | 龙vimpire

May I ask how long it will take for the review process? My application has been "under consideration" for 1 week.

(0) 讚！ | 龙vimpire

Is there any difference in the positioning and article orientation between Science Bulletin and National Science Review? Which one is better now?

(0) 讚！ | kingkingred

Hello, how did your article turn out in the end? I would like to inquire about the different stages that a submission goes through after being submitted.

(0) 讚！ | 皮卡丘68

Hello, I would like to inquire about the changes in the status that occur after submitting a contribution.

(0) 讚！ | 皮卡丘68

Yesterday my article status changed to draft, I don't know what happened? I didn't receive any email, can anyone please tell me what's going on?

(0) 讚！ | 强中王

I was just assigned as of 7.25 as an editor, but today on 7.27 it is still under consideration. I feel like it is about to be rejected.

(0) 讚！ | JayII

The submission was just made on July 18th, assigned to an editor on the 20th, and the status changed to "under considering". It has remained under considering until today. Can I ask everyone, is this status correct? Is it a bad omen with little chance of success?

(1) 讚！ | 强中王

I read an article in Angew about zinc ion battery additives for Zn-I batteries. The same additives were published by someone else in Angew first, and then this journal published an article on zinc ion batteries with the same additives. This journal is completely a fake journal, just for entertainment within the circle, with no recognition!

(0) 讚！ | 小哲000

After undergoing three rounds of review, it was finally accepted on 16th July 2024. It was the best work during my doctoral period, and I finally found a home for it.

(0) 讚！ | 中科院岳麓山实验室院长

Manuscript rejection
Editorial decisions are not simply based on counting votes or rank assessments. Sci. Bull. only has space to publish a relatively small portion of submitted papers each year and the primary responsibilities of us are to our readers and the scientific community at large; therefore, many submissions will be declined, despite favorable peer-review comments sometimes.

(0) 讚！ | 111%

Only 10% acceptance rate (as stated on the official website), even lower than sub-journals. The national team journal has a high status, never lacking in submissions, causing extreme difficulty. It's better to honestly submit to sub-journals.

(0) 讚！ | 111%

The comment is very insightful. Sci. Bull. does not really have the appearance of a major comprehensive journal. However, in this current environment, if the impact factor is not high, generally good work from small groups is often not willing to be submitted. Even large groups working on batteries and catalysis will at most only submit articles at the level of AFM or AS. If you are truly working on a non-popular topic but with high innovation, you can try submitting to research, a journal that seems to not focus on impact factors.

(0) 讚！ | 科学小白白

Are the reviews of the two pre-review experts clearly written on the official website? I've never heard of this before

(0) 讚！ | 中科院岳麓山实验室院长

When submitting, please ask two experts for a quick pre-review before considering whether to formally submit for review. The editorial department of Science Bulletin is currently paying too much attention to the potential citation frequency of each paper (i.e. the editorial department is currently too concerned about the impact factor of the journal, such as whether the original citation frequency of the corresponding author of the paper is high, and whether the H-index is high). Manuscripts with low potential citation frequencies may not be considered directly, regardless of their innovativeness or significant impact.
In fact, using the impact factor to evaluate a journal is too one-sided. Magazines that receive more submissions in popular directions such as energy and batteries are likely to see a rapid increase in their impact factor, such as Science Bulletin, which currently feels that most of the articles it receives are related to batteries and hot materials (possibly to enhance the impact factor of the journal). As a comprehensive journal, even if Science Bulletin only focuses on achieving a high impact factor, I personally feel that the international recognition of this journal as a comprehensive journal may be difficult to achieve even with a high impact factor. Whether the articles in the journal are well-researched or not ultimately depends on judgments from peer readers. Some journals have a low impact factor simply because they cover unpopular topics, but the work they publish is quite systematic and technically sound

(1) 讚！ | 小小666

I want to ask if the second revision is about formatting, did the editor ask you to change the language? My second revision editor sent a template to change the language, but I haven't heard anything back after ten days

(0) 讚！ | wscx

Cannot be regarded as a top publication. Not even qualified for a regular double-one district. Just a platform for networking

(0) 讚！ | 左张

This journal is abbreviated as sb. This abbreviation is very appropriate. Don't talk about top journals, even the level of ordinary double zone one is not there. It's just a platform for self-entertainment

(0) 讚！ | 左张

Does anyone know how long it will take for the revised language issues to be accepted after four reviewers in the second review all agree to accept it? Do we have to wait for the English editor to proofread it? Other journals usually accept submissions first and then proofread them. It feels like this process is reversed

(0) 讚！ | wscx

Your rating of this journal, submission results, submission cycle, submission experience, and other information reflect your dissatisfaction with the journal

(0) 讚！ | kgyd

To tell the truth, after changing the name to English, the reputation is not as good as it was with the previous Science Bulletin

(1) 讚！ | fission Yeast

It's better for scientists to stay away from domestic magazines like SB, which brings negative opinions from others

(1) 讚！ | fission Yeast

One primary review had three reviewers, all minor revisions, and the editor suggested minor revisions.
Surprisingly, for the second review, it was sent to a new reviewer, whose feedback was more extensive than all three reviewers in the first review combined, and the editor suggested minor revisions.
My head is still spinning now

(0) 讚！ | 中科院岳麓山实验室院长