It took about 5 months, and the review speed was relatively fast. It was submitted during the Chinese New Year. The review comments were returned in March, and major revision was required. It took two months for me to revise the manuscript before submission, and it was accepted in 20 days. What I wrote was about the analysis of tailings using spectroscopy and chemometrics, which was a bit valueless. I hope it can help you.

(3) Thank | 东华王

It is about GO magnetic field control orientation and hydrogen peroxide electrochemical detection. 2020.2.29 submission; 2020.4.20 review comments received, requiring a major revision; 2020.5.6 Raman and stability experiments supplemented, and the revised manuscript was submitted; 2020.5.12 accepted directly after it was sent for review. The second paper as co-corresponding authors was accepted after I returned to China. Although the impact factor of this journal is not high, most of the work is good. Our work was perfect, and because the students are anxious to graduate, the editor gave us the opportunity to present as a cover article. Hope it goes well! During the epidemic, it is impossible to start work and conduct experiment. It is indeed a surprise during the epidemic.

(4) Thank | blusky0303

We use mathematical derivation to get a Beer's-type law in suspension. Then, based on this law and Tyndall spectroscopy, in-situ ultraviolet-visible absorption spectroscopy was used to study the suspension formed by corrosion of metal materials in molten salt at high temperature. The work was highly praised by the reviewers of Analytical Methods, and the editor decided to make this article an upcoming Analytical Methods issue. Thank you very much!

(19) Thank | 一粒小米

After reading the submission experiences of many other researchers, I heard that my paper was accepted today, and I want to thank everyone for putting their experiences out there. The Analytical Methods review cycle is very fast; usually about half a month.

(4) Thank | 2376639945@qq.com

Have you finished your first review? Is it also in the spectroscopy field?

(0) Thank | perduf

Excuse me, is the review process for the spectroscopy direction fast, and can we find reviewers?

(0) Thank | perduf

May I ask in which specific direction you are working? I just submitted an article on terahertz spectroscopy applications today. You mentioned that the review process is slow, when did you submit yours? It hasn't been reviewed yet.

(0) Thank | perduf

Another reviewer has agreed to review the manuscript, hoping for a quicker response.

(0) Thank | Lotus_Kindon

04.07 There is a reviewer reviewing the manuscript, but the speed is too slow.

(0) Thank | Lotus_Kindon

4.4 in peer review still no reviewers have accepted the review.

(0) Thank | Lotus_Kindon

Could you please tell me how to use Track? I also want to check it out. I have been in the peer review process for almost two months now and have switched back and forth between in peer review and with editor seven or eight times.

(0) Thank | Danielwtz

3.27 With Editor: Checked with Track, no reviewers willing to review.

(0) Thank | Lotus_Kindon

3.26 With Edidor, is the result coming out soon? Looking forward to it.

(0) Thank | Lotus_Kindon

3.25 continues in peer review.

(0) Thank | Lotus_Kindon

3.20 in peer review (It's been a whole month, and the first review hasn't finished yet?)

(0) Thank | Lotus_Kindon

2.20 Submission
3.18 With Editor (switching back and forth between In Peer Review and With Editor multiple times)

(0) Thank | 田先生

Submitted on November 27, 2024
Reviewed on December 5, 2024
Major revision on January 18, 2025, with two reviewers mainly pointing out minor formatting issues and emphasizing the need to highlight the innovative aspects
Revised on January 20, 2025, in a rush to go home for the Spring Festival, completed the revision in just two days
Resubmitted on March 2, 2025, after waiting for over a month, fortunately the reviewers processed it quickly
Accepted on March 2, 2025
Regarding the optimization of analysis methods and environmental research, it involves horizontal conclusion, with a large amount of data work and possibly lacking in innovation. After going back and forth between different journals for over a year, finally submitted to RSC, thanks to RSC for their support.

(0) Thank | Aarion1209

I'm really about to cry because of this journal. Submitted on July 11, 2024, approximately a week later it was with the editor. On August 8, 2024, it was rejected and resubmitted. They asked for some additional information, but ironically, all of that was already in the original text, so I highlighted it for them. It was resubmitted on August 16, 2024, with an email detailing the changes made. It took about 3 weeks for it to be with the editor again. Then the long process of going back and forth between with editor and in peer review began (mostly with editor). And now, today, it's still with the editor. I don't understand why this is taking so long, my research is not even that uncommon. Why can't I get the reviewer's comments?

(0) Thank | Annita欣

I work on fluorescent probes.
Submitted on 2024.09.18
Two days later (peer review)
Minor revisions on 2024.10.20
Submitted revised manuscript on 2024.10.26
Accepted on 2024.11.01

(0) Thank | Helium11

Hybrid journals, offering both traditional subscriptions and gold open access options.

(0) Thank | 一只小虫子

Submitted on June 17th, revised on July 24th, the revisions were acceptable, and it was accepted five days after the revision. Looking forward to the impact factor increasing a bit more.

(0) Thank | 一颗烂番茄

Hello, is this journal truly open access after acceptance?

(0) Thank | 1ko2oi

2024.6.7 Already voted

(0) Thank | yangxinyao

1.21   submitted to journal
1.31   In peer review
3.27   Major revision
4.9   resubmitted
4.11   accepted
Review process was not as fast as anticipated. Although there were major revisions suggested, most of the issues were related to formatting. After making the necessary revisions, the paper was accepted without needing to be sent for further review

(0) Thank | 一只小虫子

Finally accepted! Went through a major revision and a minor revision! The editor did a great job! It's just that the reviewer seemed a bit nitpicky! But overall, I'm grateful! I hope this provides a time example for future or aspiring contributors!

(0) Thank | Bella