2020.04.02, submitted; 2020.04.03, editor assigned; 2020.05.02, the comments of first review were returned, and major revision was required. There were two reviewers. The deadline given was June17; 2020.05.11, the revised manuscript was returned to the editor; 2020.05.30, accepted. It took about two months from submission to acceptance, and the speed was fast. At the same time, thank you, editor Jianfeng Li. What I do is on environmental catalyst, and the direction of the article is the research on the mechanism of catalysts. It may be relatively popular in cross-fields, but what most valued by the Journal of Physical Chemistry C is also the analysis of the mechanism. I have the same feelings as those downstairs. As a time-honored and top journal, the Journal of Physical Chemistry C does not follow the hot topics, and the quality of articles is very good. I still hope that the Journal of Physical Chemistry C can get better and better.

(20) Thank | Eillita

A manuscript submitted to Journal of Physical Chemistry Letter on October 26 was rejected and it was suggested to transfer to Journal of Physical Chemistry C. 1125 major revision; 1201 submit; 1214 revision. The second reviewer always said rejection, the first reviewer recommended direct acceptance, and then I wrote a detailed reply to reviewer 2. 1216 submit; 1230 reject. Reviewer 2 still rejected it, and the editor rejected it. Every time the manuscript was returned, the editor sent “supplementary journal cover invitation”. Because the fee was $1495, I continued to disagree. I don’t know whether there was such a factor. If I agreed, would it be accepted? I don’t know whether other people who submitted manuscripts to Journal of Physical Chemistry C received “supplementary journal cover invitation”.

(0) Thank | 独家记忆

My research is about molecular dynamics simulation and force field development of molten salt. The first submission was on January 25, 2019. We urged it on March 28, 2019. The editor informed that one reviewer had returned the comments, but another reviewer hadn’t. We didn't know why until later. Rejected on April 1, 2019, with a major revision required (The reviewer gave us a lot of useful suggestions for modification, and said that my calculations are very attractive, and I should have a chance to be accepted after the modification), and a rejection (It was estimated that because I urged once. The reviewer didn’t give any review comments at all, literally. He just sticked to some small problems in the article and said that the calculations I did was not matched with the experiment. In fact, they all can be explained, but he just rejected it directly and didn’t care about the innovative points of the article). After discussing with my supervisor, we decided not to rebuttal, and revised in accordance with the reviewer’s comments for one month before submitting. It was resubmitted on May 26, 2019. The editor sent it for review on the same day. It was the same deputy editor as the last time. The editor was very polite and nice. Maybe the reviewer I met was too bad, as the review speed was too slow, and the second reviewer didn’t mention any comments. I finally accepted the loss, and hoped it can be accepted after resubmission, and this half year's efforts will not be in vain.

(11) Thank | 想发TOP

I would not recommend submitting projects to this journal. I received comments back about two months after submission. The first reviewer said it was not suitable for publication as it did not include any new ideas. The reviewer included some of their opinions on structural characterization and there were many questions about the grain size. The second reviewer said it was not suitable for publication in its current form. The reviewer added a bunch of opinions on electrochemical performance and questioned the physical area. I was told that this journal is partial to physics, but there can be no synthesis in the title and there was a 45-day deadline. We rushed to conduct the experiment, and fortunately the repeatability was good, although not 100%, but it was still acceptable. The supplemented experiment matched the manuscript and the review comments. The day before the deadline, we submitted a revised draft, but a copyright form was not filled out. A month later, the editor-in-chief asked why the copyright form was not filled out and the portal was opened for another 24 hours. I was very happy at first, thinking that I was accepted, and later I found out that my paper was not yet accepted. I went to the website and wanted to fill out the form, but I encountered system maintenance. After waiting for a long time, after the system was restored, I was able to fill out the form and I was finally accepted. I am thankful for the good experience I had with Letpub.

(13) Thank | wwmwwm

Three days after submission, the deputy editor was assigned. Two days later, the manuscript was rejected for being too application-oriented.

Without any changes, it was then submitted to PCCP and accepted after two rounds of revisions. Interestingly, the reviewers at PCCP even suggested adding more application descriptions.

JPCL, JPCC, and PCCP have all been published. When will I be able to take the next step?

(0) Thank | rugals

May I ask what the status of the review process is?

(0) Thank | www1013

Very quick and professional timeline as follows:
12.06 submitted
12.10 assigned to editor
12.17 minor revise
12.23 accept
Wish the journal better and better!

(0) Thank | 北北丶

It has been four days since submission, is there a high chance of rejection?

(0) Thank | 十二月天

May I ask how to check if a submission has been sent for review in the submission system? The article has been in "Under Review" status since it was submitted, and it has been 10 days now. I'm not sure if it has been sent for review.

(0) Thank | jiamaolee

Please translate the following paragraph into English: langmuir

(0) Thank | 全岛铁盒

It's a bit difficult to lift the first district, so let's choose the second or third district

(0) Thank | 牛乳局局长

PNAS!!!

(0) Thank | 关中的土里埋皇上

Environmental geochemistry direction, mineral ion interfacial adsorption direction, colloids and surface Lamuier, physical chemistry chemical physics, Journal of Physical Chemistry. How do you choose?

(0) Thank | 牛乳局局长

2024.1.11 accept

(0) Thank | 2023wdx

2024.1.10 submit revision

(0) Thank | 2023wdx

2023.11.21 Submission
2023.12.30 Minor revision

(0) Thank | 2023wdx

The paper went through the steps of rejection, major revision, minor revision, and finally acceptance.
It was initially submitted to JPCL on December 14, 2022. On December 23, the editor rejected it and suggested submitting to JPCC.
The formatting was modified to match the style of "Journal of Physical Chemistry C."
It was resubmitted on January 6, coinciding with the Lunar New Year. Due to the holiday and the COVID-19 pandemic, it took about 2 months for the reviewers to provide feedback.
On March 6, the reviewers' comments were received. The first reviewer suggested minor revisions, while the second reviewer suggested major revisions, which the editor agreed with.
The revised manuscript was submitted on March 29.
On May 2, the reviewer's comments for minor revisions came back.
On the morning of May 4, it was submitted again and accepted on the same day.

(0) Thank | Linger123

2023.2.13 Submission
2.15 Review
3.16 Received minor revisions in the review comments
3.22 Submitted revised manuscript
3.30 (Deadline for returning the revised manuscript)
4.5 Accepted

(0) Thank | Cliff-y

4.5号accept translates to "Accept on the 4.5th."

(0) Thank | Cliff-y

How long has it been since the review comments came back?

(0) Thank | 驰驰123

How long does it take to reply to the review comments?

(0) Thank | 驰驰123

Reviewed for one month on 16th March 2023, with comments from two reviewers. They provided minor revisions and requested the revised manuscript to be returned before the 30th.

(0) Thank | Cliff-y

Hello, may I ask which stage the article is currently in?

(0) Thank | fghkjjlk

How long does the first trial take? It feels like waiting indefinitely.

(0) Thank | Cliff-y

According to mjkIII, the journals and magazines in Zone 3 are all bad, while the ones in Zone 1 and 2 are good. It's scary.

(0) Thank | LongY