9 No. 18 submission, October 15th overhaul, No. 22 upload revised draft, No. 26 reverse modified reference format, No. 28 reception. Overall feeling to do some theoretical analysis.

(1) Thank | vsdvgdas

10.17Submission, I feel that there are too many JPCC manuscripts, and the light-checking submission took two days, then 10.20 was rejected, and the efficiency is still quite high!Hahahaha~~~~Although the content of the submission was chemical, it did not have sufficient and in-depth physical descriptions and research, so it was rejected.

(0) Thank | huanxiang

After 21 days of submission, I received the revised comments of the overhaul, changed it for one month, and returned to the manuscript. After two days, I overhauled it again, changed it for a week, and returned to the manuscript.After three days, return, receive, feel very efficient ah

(0) Thank | juanxincai

I am mainly engaged in computational chemistry, this is my first small paper, can be JPPCAccepted is still very happy: submitted on May 13; two reviewers gave minor repairs on June 1; submitted again on June 7; accepted on June 10; published on July 14.The overall feeling is very fast.(J. Phys. Chem. C, 2016, 120 (27), pp 14840–14853)

(8) Thank | 404283110@qq.com

is very fast, and the editing service is efficient and professional.Submission on July 25th, review comments on August 23rd, and acceptance on the 30th.

(3) Thank | zhangzhi1053@126.com

Reviewing two months, so slow

(3) Thank | xx

is about the work of gas phase formation of nanoclusters, and it is also a psychological contribution to try it out.Two reviewers in the first instance, two months to review the draft comments, a clear rejection of the draft a clear receipt.However, the reviewers who refused to comment said that there was no new idea in the work, and there was no other substantive opinion. Perhaps it was at this point that the editor gave the overhaul.After supplementing the experimental data and seriously considering the reviewer's questions, one and a half months of revised manuscript was thrown out and accepted directly after one week.In general, the review process of JPCC is strict, the problem is very sharp, and the work needs to be completed into a system.

(0) Thank | hj

My first SCI employment paper.I am very grateful to JPCC for confirming me.The so-called "ACS production", quality I trust.Of course, the quality of the paper still has to be good first, and it must be the "appetite" of JPCC. Although it contains "Physical", the focus is still on "Chemistry". Remember this.Have a good argument and put forward your own insights. Even if you don't solve this problem for the time being, it is ok.The editorial department of ACS is still quite responsible. Generally speaking, the editorial department will notify the author of the communication within half a month.This does not hinder the follow-up process of everyone.In short, I will still use ACS as the first choice in the future related chemistry papers.

(5) Thank | 雾之祥

Electrochemical direction, do lithium battery, 2013-7-31 contribution, 9-24 review, three reviewers, 2 major repairs 1 minor repair, the problem is very professional, give 2Month modification time, 11-11 change submitted, 11-22 direct reception, speed is OK, my first SCI, no experience, only for reference

(1) Thank | Anonymous

2012 have selectd 2 in total,All of them were reviewed for 40 days, and the reviewers were very professional and eventually received after overhaul.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

The first submission, one week, divided into editors, after three weeks of editing, the editor sent a letter to TOC (has been given at the time of submission), what is the situation, whether it is submitted for review?The person who has selectd gives an analysis of what is going on.....

(1) Thank | Anonymous

Reviewer is very sharp, and has raised more than 10 questions, which is very helpful for improving the article grade!

(0) Thank | Anonymous

The review time is 50 days, all of which are positive opinions. The theoretical foundation is good enough. It can be modified for one month and accepted for about three months.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

I met the editor very well, so I accepted it very quickly.The reviewers are more rigorous. Through revisions, the articles have been greatly improved, and the questions raised are very good, which allows me to think more deeply.I am not rigorous myself, and the teacher is not correct in the reference.Delayed the time, or it will be faster.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

4.3Submission, 4.23 Received the revised comments and gave a three-month deadline.7.22 After the modification, it will be thrown again (mainly due to various busy, in fact, it can be thrown out early) 7.31 Confirmation Receive

(0) Thank | Anonymous

6 Submitted on the 17th, returning comments on July 23, two minor repairs, repairReceived today.The review is fast, the editing is also very good, and the efficiency is high

(1) Thank | Anonymous

The receiving difficulty is increased.I recently selectd for one, and I think that the theme is novel. I didn't have this big research before, but I was rejected because of the research method. (One reviewer thinks the method is open to question, minor repair, and the other thinks it is unreliable. According to the draft. ActuallyReliability can be fully demonstrated, minor repairs can be, but the editor directly refused the draft).

(1) Thank | Anonymous

has selectd for 4 articles, two editors have not been submitted for trial, and both of them have been accepted for review.The speed is very fast, the second one is from the time of posting to publication for 2 months.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

Magazine's full name is "the JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C". There is one less the

(3) Thank | Anonymous

2012 impact factor 4.814.Basically the same as last year.It's a good journal, but the motivation and space for the impact factor continues to rise, because the new JPC-Letters have scattered many of JPCC's high-quality manuscripts.

(1) Thank | Anonymous

2 Submitted in the month, after half a month, the editor gave him several reviewers' names, and then sent them for review. After more than 40 days, the review comments came back.Both reviewers are two questions. The first question is similar and difficult to answer.I answered the question from the side. After 10 days, I submitted it. After 40 days, the reviewer's opinion came back. I thought that there was no evidence or insufficient. I revised the submission again. After half a month, a reviewer agreed to accept it, one for minor repair, but no longer.Submitted for review.Submitted after revision, accepted on the day of editing.This article has taken a lot of effort, and jpcc is getting harder and harder.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

This journal responds quickly, and has reviewed four articles. The editor is for 21 days review

(0) Thank | Anonymous

for about one month.The reviewer is very responsible and the review is very objective.Is a good journal

(0) Thank | Anonymous

1 The manuscript was submitted on the 7th of July. It is now February 11th. The review comments have not yet returned. I hope that I can make good luck in the new year.!On the morning of February 16th, I received the editor's letter to modify the format, mainly referring to the literature, adding keywords and other four requirements, which shows that JPPC has gradually increased the requirements for the format of submitted articles.Accepted on February 19th.I wrote this article last March, and it was not until September that I revised it and started to contribute. I was rejected by carbon, and then I changed the content of the article according to the revised comments and then changed to JPCC.The March 16 article was typeset out.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

The IMPACT is now increasing up to 4.8 and it is also more difficult to get published rather than some years ago.

(1) Thank | Anonymous