Refusing to charge for OA does not necessarily have anything to do with fees

(0) 讚！ | Libern

Is the journal really charging for OA?

(0) 讚！ | 科研界的小裁缝

The small research group did not have any big names to support their submission

(0) 讚！ | Libern

Small research group, can choose double-blind review, the fairest SCI I have ever seen. I thought the requirements were low before submission, but I found that the reviewers were professional and the requirements were very high. After major revisions, the quality of the article has improved significantly. It feels painful, but thank the editor for appreciating our work and hope the journal will continue to improve!

(16) 讚！ | Libern

Possibly arbitrated

(0) 讚！ | bb-nsc

Received two negative comments from Angew, rejected, then submitted to CS on March 22nd. Under peer review on March 30th, with editor on May 9th, and back in peer review on May 10th. Do you know what's going on with this?

(0) 讚！ | 米玉米233

Hello, do you have to install CS into the template?

(1) 讚！ | 小强

It's been 8 days and it still hasn't reached the editor

(0) 讚！ | Crush

This journal is really not good anymore, mismanagement, bad attitude, quality is declining

(2) 讚！ | zhangboyu

It took a month for the submission to be reviewed, with a total of two reviewers. Only one reviewer's opinion directly led to rejection. The reviewer focused on format issues, including grammar and word choices, as well as unclear color descriptions in the images, ultimately concluding that the submission was not suitable for publication. Throughout the submission process, there was a lack of respect for the time and effort of the submitter. Encountering a kind reviewer was fortunate, but encountering a negligent reviewer was disastrous. One can only deceive themselves by attributing the low Impact Factor to a lack of filler material in the manuscript. Seeing the reviewer's comments was infuriating, feeling insulted, ultimately deciding to share this experience here in hopes of warning others

(1) 讚！ | 憨憨

Taking so long to review? I submitted an article five days ago and it still hasn't reached the editor, oh my!

(79) 讚！ | Y

Received on 2024.03.07

(0) 讚！ | Kento_Mo

Received the review comments on January 31, 2024. Both reviewers were quite friendly, one agreed with minor revisions and no additional experiments are needed.
Submitted the revised manuscript on February 14, 2024

(0) 讚！ | Kento_Mo

Submitted to ANGEW was rejected, resubmitted to ChemSci.
Submitted on 18th December 2023.
Sent for review on 9th January 2024

(0) 讚！ | Kento_Mo

May I ask how long the review process usually takes?

(0) 讚！ | AugensternNN

Free of charge

(0) 讚！ | 不吃葱的喵酱

Hello, is there any charge for this journal? I see it is mentioned as OA open access, but there is also a note saying no article processing fee

(0) 讚！ | wyttttttt

Small research group, submitting to Chemical Science for the first time, did not realize that only top groups are invited for review

(0) 讚！ | 不吃葱的喵酱

Submitted on September 5th, received reviewer comments on October 3rd. Two reviewers: one gave a score of 9, accepted after revision; the other gave a score of 10, accepted directly. Submitted revised version on October 19th and accepted on October 23rd

(0) 讚！ | 不吃葱的喵酱

Submission Experience:
7.18 submit
About a week later with editor
Two weeks later in peer review
9.08 major revision, back and forth between with editor and in peer review, nudged the manuscript once, both reviewers requested revisions
9.26 returned, in peer review the same day
10.17 minor revision
10.23 returned
10.30 accept

(0) 讚！ | Flifhting

It is reasonable that ACS Catalysis is better than CS because all articles from the neighboring group were rejected by ACS Catalysis and accepted by CS

(0) 讚！ | qwe309

Will CS not continue to decline like CC

(0) 讚！ | 冷面男

ACS Catalysis seems to focus more on the interface reaction mechanism and does not pay much attention to band gap control and bulk charge separation

(0) 讚！ | 冷面男

6.25 submit
6.26 with editor
6.27 in peer review
7.12 minor revision, both reviewers suggested minor revisions
7.14 revised
7.14 accepted
It was a smooth submission process. The reviewers were professional and friendly. The editor handled the revisions quickly, and the paper was accepted within two hours of resubmission.

(1) 讚！ | tianshi

If it drops to 8.4, it is estimated that it will continue to decline further.

(0) 讚！ | CNS