As the name suggests, Geophysical means geophysics. Although positioning as a comprehensive journal, GRL and JGR-SE are both journals focus on geophysics, and they are is two of the few Nature Index journals in the field of geophysics. But the worst thing is that these two journals are selected into the Nature Index. Under the call of some domestic research institutes and universities to strongly pursue these Indexes, domestic researchers in geology, geochemistry and other disciplines have rushed to these two journals--Occupied a lot of pages--making it more difficult for people who are engaged in geophysics to publish. Just take a look at how many papers published in these two journals by the domestic leader IGGCAS in the past two years are directly related to geophysics. In fact, there are many journals with high impact factor in geology, geochemistry, petrology, etc., but most of them are not selected in the Nature Index (but the number of the journals is still more than that in geophysics). It is recommended that the majority of geophysicians actively cite the papers published in the past two years in their own disciplines to increase the influence of Geophysics, Geophysical Prospecting, GJI, and other journals. Compared with the field of geology, geochemistry, petrology, the IF of the journals in our field is too low. It has been too low, which is not conducive to subject development.

(87) Thank | novelP

Published since 1973, Geology features rapid publication of about 23 refereed short (four-page) papers each month. Articles cover all earth-science disciplines and include new investigations and provocative topics. Earth and Planetary Science Letters (EPSL) is a leading journal for researchers across the entire Earth and planetary sciences community. Geology and Earth and Planetary Science Letters (EPSL) really cover the entire earth science.

(5) Thank | oceanography

The second Reviewer gave a relatively negative evaluation, "I think the results will be of interest to readers of GRL. However, there are several important deficiencies in the article that should prevent publication in its current form." The editor-in-chief of Science Category 2, Presentation Category B rejected it. Although it was rejected, some of the opinions given by the reviewers are still very valuable. (Of course some parts are a bit too much) I hope I have good luck next time.

(9) Thank | novelP

So far, I have submitted three papers to GRLs in total, and each time I thought it was one of my best jobs, but sadly they were all rejected by GRL. The first two times the papers were not even peer reviewed, but luckily they were later published in journals highly recognized in the field. The third submission was finally sent for peer review. Two of the reviewers suggested major revision, but the third reviewer said there was no novelty at all, so the editor rejected the paper. I wasn’t convinced so I revised according to the comments of the other two reviewers and wrote a long reply to refute the third reviewer. Then I emailed the editor to ask for the opportunity to resubmit the manuscript; however, it was useless. The editor insisted on his decision and replied that I shouldn’t submit this manuscript to GRL again. So I had to submit to another journal. I carefully read the papers published on GRL, but I feel some of them are not that novel. I’m determined to publish a paper in GRL, and after that, I will never submit to GRL again.

(29) Thank | 1456191132@qq.com

GRL was placed in the second district and severely slapped the face of the Chinese Academy of Sciences district. Ask those in the field of geology what value GRL has before dividing it again!

(0) Thank | kjlhg

WRR and GRL, top journals in the industry, are categorized as 2nd tier. Journal of Plant Ecology, a Chinese journal, has gradually moved from 3rd tier to 1st tier. The quality of articles inside varies greatly, it's really bold to make such obvious manipulations.

(0) Thank | 24March

In addition, the partition table that only needs to do one thing in a year has been delayed from December to February, then from February to March, and finally delayed until the end of the natural fund application. Are you not ashamed of eating the rice of taxpayers? Your indexes, which have no credibility, can be calculated by a college student in less than a week. Why do you insist on delaying the time, always being ambiguous about when it will be released, dragging on and on, disappointing all researchers. It's a pile of thick shit.

(1) Thank | 小孔吼吼

The Chinese Academy of Sciences is a joke. Our group just submitted a paper to GRL and got disgusted by the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Here are some data for everyone to see: In the field of materials, there are a total of 495 journals, with 10.30% in Zone 1, 13.94% in Zone 2, and 20.81% in Zone 3. Among Zone 1 journals, domestic journals account for 45.10%. - from "Learning Strategy".

(0) Thank | 小孔吼吼

The submitted article is in the field of structural geology, with some work on sedimentology, isotope dating, and other sub-disciplines mixed in.

Submitted in June 24, accepted in March 25, the whole process took 9 months. The initial review required major revisions, the second review minor revisions, and the third review led to direct acceptance, with an average review period of two to three months.

This article was previously submitted to Geology in 23 but unfortunately was rejected after one round. Compared to Geology, I personally feel that the difficulty of GRL is relatively lower, the review process is faster, and the length requirements are more flexible. If there is a need for journals in the Nature index, GRL and JGR: Solid Earth are relatively more cost-effective choices.

By the way, let me complain about the officials who decided to place GRL in the second tier in the Chinese Academy of Sciences' classification table for 2025. Some domestically produced journals with average quality and reputation have somehow been elevated to the first or second tier, which is truly baffling. Can you please publicly disclose the specific calculation method for the impact factor and the quantitative scores that determine the ranking of journals? It's like a geological hammer hitting you on the face every year with these behind-the-scenes operations!

(1) Thank | 野外出到昏厥

AGU Advance is in competition with NC and SA, one level higher than GRL, and allows for longer articles.

(0) Thank | 林宇艾

I'm really frustrated. The journal I just submitted to has been downgraded to the second tier. I revised the manuscript with great effort, thinking it was a good journal, but it ended up in the second tier. I never expected that even with ecological indicators, it could only make it to the second tier.

(2) Thank | 化身孤岛的鲸

The overall speed is very fast, and the comments made by the reviewers are all very good, pointing out the deficiencies and problems in the research. A major revision, a minor revision, submit the revised manuscript a month later, and receive acceptance 7 days later.

(0) Thank | 化身孤岛的鲸

I'm a little confused about the positioning of AGU's journals... GRL should be AGU's flagship journal, but in 2020 they also launched AGU Advances, a new journal with a scope that highly overlaps with GRL and a high research quality. So, is AGU Advances meant to replace GRL as the flagship journal, or are they both considered flagship journals, one old and one new? Can someone who understands this topic explain and clarify it for me?

(0) Thank | ahaha233

It has been 11 days waiting for the Associate Editor assignment, is this journal always this slow?

(0) Thank | phyang

How much does this layout cost?

(0) Thank | ZYS

500 words = 1 PSU, 1 image = 1 PSU, 1 table = 1 PSU, with a maximum length of 12 PSU.

(0) Thank | Csy_ocean

May I ask if GRL requires 12 pages, but I don’t know how many words, can I submit my 6300 words now?

(0) Thank | Hhmper

First Round
Submitted 2024-01-08
Under Review 2024-01-19
Decision Made; Email Confirmation Sent 2024-03-05
Comments from two reviewers:
Reviewer #1
Science Category: 2
Presentation Category: B
Key Points (Required): Yes
Reviewer #2
Science Category: 2
Presentation Category: A
Key Points (Required): Yes
Both reviewers' comments were mostly major revisions. After considering the reviewers' comments, the editor decided to reject the submission without requiring revisions and encouraged resubmission.

Second Round
Submitted 2024-11-11
Under Review 2024-11-15
Decision Made; Email Confirmation Sent 2024-12-17
Fortunately, the manuscript was returned to the original editor and back to the hands of the original two reviewers. The reviewers unanimously agreed that the revisions were well done and recommended acceptance. The editor ultimately decided to accept the submission.

(0) Thank | Csy_ocean

What happened later, I am in the same situation as you, but even slower than you.

(0) Thank | baqianniao

2024.11.12 rejection, overall feedback is okay, not sure why it was rejected.

(0) Thank | 学术工

The second one has also been found Under Review on 2024-10-22 12:39:47.

(0) Thank | 学术工

The second one has also been found.

(0) Thank | 学术工

Waiting for Reviewer Assignment 2024-10-04
Associate Editor Assigned 2024-10-04
Waiting for Associate Editor Assignment 2024-09-19
Editor Assigned 2024-09-19
Waiting for Editor Assignment 2024-09-19
Initial Quality Control Complete 2024-09-19
Initial Quality Control Started 2024-09-18
Editor Assigned 2024-09-18
Waiting for Editor Assignment 2024-09-18
Author Approved Converted Files 2024-09-18
Preliminary Manuscript Data Submitted 2024-09-18 Am I not being reviewed?

(0) Thank | 东波

Submitted on 9/17, currently under review.

(0) Thank | 学术工

May I ask what is going on with this step of waiting for associate editor assignment? It has been 6 days and the date has not changed.

(0) Thank | 我只会写sci