09.11 Submit; 09.19 With editor; 09.21 In peer review; 10.07 Reject (2 reviewer; reviewer 1 was very professional, who should be an expert in the industry, raised 11 comments, and recommended a rejection. Reviewer 2 was relatively good, approved the innovation, but considered it as not perfect, raised 10 comments, and didn’t recommend to accept it in the current state! The editor rejected it but allow resubmission); 10.27 Resubmit (the revision was very detailed, with about 30 pages); 10.28 it was returned by the technical review, because the modified contents were not highlighted in red; 11.01 with editor; 11.05 in peer review (second review, and it was sent to the original reviewer again); 12.01 major revision (reviewer 1 had one comment, and required one experiment to be redone; reviewer 2 agreed to accept it; the editor required a major revision); 12.08 revision submitted (major revision was resubmitted in 7 days); 2020.12.09 with editor (the label in one revised figure was wrong, and it was found by the editor, and the file was updated); 12.12 in peer review; 12.21 accepted. (Overall, the reviewers are very professional, the editor is very friendly, and JMCA is very rigorous.) This is the first article in my master period, and it took more than three months before and after. But when it was about to be accepted, I suddenly heard that JMCA had dropped to Q2. It fails to attain our hope! And I’m crying to death in the toilet.

(109) Thank | 懵逼树下懵逼果

2020-01-03 submit to journal; 2020-01-?? with editor. It may be in mid-January; 2020-01-?? in peer review. It may be sent for review a few days after with editor; 2020-01-?? The status “with editor” appeared during this period; 2020-01-?? The status “in peer review” appeared during this period; 2020-02-09 minor revision; 2020-02-21 a revision has been submitted; 2020-02-22 with editor; 2020-02-22 in peer review; 2020-02-23 accept. We didn’t recommend any editor at the time of submission, and it was the Christmas and New Year holidays, so it took more than ten days from submission to assigning editor, and then it was sent for review soon. The review speed is also relatively fast. Both reviewers required minor revisions, and the comments were relatively positive. These questions were not difficult to answer, and there was no need to make up experiments. But our attitude to answer questions was still very serious. It took 10 days to continuously modify and improve the article. The revised version was accepted two days after resubmission. Generally speaking, the submission experience is good and the review speed is very fast.

(3) Thank | wangjl712

After the article was submitted to Angew, the editor asked to transfer to ChemsusChem, and then to EES. The editor asked to transfer to JMCA, and then to Energy Storge Material, finally to a new journal. The reasons for rejection of each journal were different. But I switched to JMCA for my graduation. The article was submitted on April 3 and sent for review on April 6. On the day of April 17, I received the reviewers’ comments. Both of the two reviewers suggested major revisions, with 17 comments in total, and because there were many sub-questions in the questions, the editor requested a major revision. Although the editor urged the revised submission on May 3, he gave me another ten days for the need to supplement the data. I responded the reviewers’ comments with 23 pages on May 12 and the manuscript was accepted on May 14. The efficiency of JMCA was still very high. The IF should reach 10 in 2019, and it will get harder and harder to be accepted now, which is not as easy as before. But it's still difficult for a group without the authorities. Now the rejection rate of JMCA is 80%, and reviewers must give comments within 10 days, so the review speed is relatively fast. Thanks to the editor of Cambridge, Daniella Ferluccio!

(23) Thank | 南

April 20 submitted to EES, rejected without peer review, and the journal suggested transfer to JMCA. May 10 submitted to Nano Energy, rejected immediately. May 23 submitted to JMCA; June 07 two reviewers asked for minor revisions. I needed to answer some questions and add an experiment.  June 24 revision submitted; July 13 accepted. The article is mainly on electrochemical energy storage. From experimental design to material synthesis, characterization, and testing and to the writing of the manuscript, all completed by myself. Didn’t get much help from my master program advisor. Didn’t spend that much time on doing the experiments for this paper, but the time spent on revising the paper was really long. The introduction alone was revised five times (each time a complete rewrite; countless times if I also consider those revisions on language only). The paragraph before the conclusion and the conclusion was revised many times too. Now that I have graduated, the paper is finally accepted. If it was accepted earlier, I might have considered continuing my study to get a PhD.

(103) Thank | m18149731020@163.com

On February 20, 2025, submitted for review.
On March 20, 2025, received revised manuscript, with major revisions, from two reviewers. The editor-in-chief proactively sent an email midway through the process, stating that the review time was extended due to the inability to find suitable reviewers.
On April 14, 2025, revised manuscript was resubmitted.
On April 29, 2025, accepted.
Looking forward to seeing the first JMCA paper succeed more and more!

(0) Thank | 费米球

2025.01.19 Submitted
2025.01.24 In Peer Review
(One reviewer ghosted)
2025.03.18 Major Revision
(2 reviewers, no specific deadline given)
2025.04.05 Revision Submitted
2025.04.07 In Peer Review
(Both reviewers submitted comments)
2025.04.22 Accept

Evie Karkera handled the process quickly, addressing feedback promptly. Thumbs up!

(0) Thank | March君

3.2 Submission checking and files
3.2 Initial assessment on the same evening
3.18 In peer review (waited for two weeks and still in initial assessment, then asked the teacher to send a reminder letter, and sent for review the next day)
3.25 Major revision (reviewed by Chinese reviewers, completed in one week)
4.3 Revisions
4.4 Acceptance (reviewers were still working during the Qingming Festival)
This submission process was really smooth.

(0) Thank | 舞铲阶级必胜

My article was accepted on March 28th, and the publishing agreement was signed on March 29th. However, I have not received the Proof file yet. I would like to ask the experienced predecessors who have published before, how long does it usually take to receive the Proof file? Thank you!

(0) Thank | 不爱学术的研究生

Yusuke Yamauchi, Associate Editor at the University of Queensland, is incredibly efficient, typically processing manuscripts as soon as they are received.

(0) Thank | 接了喔

Submission on March 7, 2025
Reviewed by peers on March 14, 2025
Major revisions requested on March 25, 2025
Revisions submitted on April 5, 2025
Under review by editor on April 7, 2025
Reviewed by peers again on April 7, 2025
Accepted on April 8, 2025

(2) Thank | 接了喔

Accept on 28th March 2025.
My first JMCA, I have always wanted one before, finally my dream came true. I sincerely thank my kind-hearted editor, who is efficient and beautiful, and also a respected academician. I am also grateful for the suggestions made by my reviewer, which greatly improved the quality of our paper. The revision letter was 70 pages long, with over 15,000 words, which is a testament to the hard work put in over the past ten days. I hope JMCA continues to improve, and I wish all graduate students to encounter kind-hearted editors and reviewers. Good luck!

(0) Thank | 不爱学术的研究生

2025.3.10 Major revision
2025.3.27 Revision submitted
2025.3.28 with editor
Looking forward to a good outcome.

(0) Thank | 不爱学术的研究生

Some have already reached three zones.

(0) Thank | xf jay chou

Very fast, but dropped to Zone Three.

(1) Thank | xf jay chou

2.14 Submission
2.21 Review
3.17 4 reviewers, 2 feedbacks received
......
Is the review process considered fast or slow?

(0) Thank | 但行何妨

Recent experiences include one submission and one just submitted for review, hoping for smooth progress:

2024.04.08 Submitted
2024.04.16 With editor
2024.04.17 In peer review
2024.05.05 Revision
2024.05.22 Revision submitted
2024.05.22 With editor
2024.05.23 In peer review
2024.06.03 Accepted
2024.06.04 Online
2024.06.11 Proof.
2025.02.17 Submitted
2025.02.24 With editor and in peer review
2025.03.11 With editor
2025.03.11 In peer review (added a reviewer, hoping for successful arbitration)

(0) Thank | 浙大玉泉

Could you please let me know if the status of the paper you submitted has changed? My paper has been stuck in the Initial assessment stage for a long time as well.

(0) Thank | 卓锟

Find reviewers. If the reviewers refuse to review, the status will change, or if the reviewer's review comments come back, it will also change.

(0) Thank | 晨曦serendipity

Hello, may I ask how long you have been with WE?

(1) Thank | 晨曦serendipity

Hello, may I ask if you are with WE?

(0) Thank | 晨曦serendipity

I am the first one to submit my application, and currently it is still in the initial assessment stage. I haven't received any updates yet, it has been half a month.

(0) Thank | 晨曦serendipity

Brother, we both submitted on the same day, and I am still in the initial evaluation stage.

(0) Thank | 舞铲阶级必胜

Submitted on March 2, 2025
Initial assessment on March 10, 2024
This is too long, is the Initial assessment of RSC journals equivalent to submitting to Elsevier journals? Why is it taking so long?

(1) Thank | 爱科研还是爱黄金

The speed is quite fast, the second JMCA. I hope to move up to the first district soon, keep pushing.
Submitted on January 23, 2025
Major revision on February 13, 2025
Submitted for revision on February 26, 2025, in peer review the same day
After with editor, in peer review again on March 6, 2025
Accepted on March 9, 2025

(1) Thank | 小陈

Do I have to submit my manuscript according to the template requirements of the journal when submitting it for review?

(0) Thank | CMN1997