ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 'Under Review': What Each Status Means
If your ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces submission shows Under Review, here is what the Associate Editors are doing during each stage and when to follow up.
What to do next
Already submitted to ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces? Use this page to interpret the status and choose the next step.
The useful next step is understanding what the status usually means at ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, how long the wait normally runs, and when a follow-up is actually reasonable.
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces review timeline: what the data shows
Time to first decision is the most actionable number. What happens after varies by manuscript and reviewer availability.
What shapes the timeline
- Desk decisions are fast. Scope problems surface within days.
- Reviewer availability is the main variable after triage. Specialized topics take longer to assign.
- Revision rounds reset the clock. Major revision typically adds 6-12 weeks per round.
What to do while waiting
- Track status in the submission portal — status changes signal active review.
- Wait at least the journal's stated median before sending a status inquiry.
- Prepare revision materials in parallel if you expect a revise-and-resubmit decision.
Last reviewed: 2026-05-17.
Quick answer: If your ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces submission shows "Under Review," elapsed time is the most reliable signal. ACS AMI has a 2024 JCR impact factor of 9.5, accepts roughly 35 to 40 percent of submissions, and SciRev community data shows the first review round averages about 1.2 months with accepted manuscripts averaging about 1.7 months in total handling time and immediate rejections averaging about 8 days (per ACS AMI author guidelines). Reviewers are typically given 3 to 4 weeks, and ACS is generally good about enforcement of reviewer deadlines, with late reviewers getting reminders and editors usually finding replacements when reviewers go silent.
For a second opinion before reviewers see your manuscript, run a ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces submission readiness check.
Submission portal and editorial contact: ACS AMI uses ACS Paragon Plus at acsparagonplus.acs.org. Editorial questions should reference the manuscript ID; aami@acs.org handles editorial-office inquiries. The ACS AMI author guidelines and ACS AMI information for authors at pubs.acs.org/page/aamick/for-authors cover the editorial workflow. For broader status-tracking guidance across materials publishers, the Cell Press author status portal at cell.com/information-for-authors/after-you-submit gives useful baseline patterns for reading status fields across editorial portals.
How ACS handles an ACS AMI submission
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces uses a traditional editorial structure where submissions go to a handling Associate Editor with relevant expertise who decides whether to send the paper to reviewers or reject at the desk. ACS AMI Associate Editors are working researchers in applied materials science, not professional editors; the senior handling Associate Editor reads the entire paper and evaluates applied-materials interface utility, methodological rigor, and ACS AMI subspecialty routing across surfaces and interfaces, applications and devices, biological and medical applications, energy applications, and functional materials. An Associate Editor at ACS AMI typically handles 100 to 200 manuscripts per year and spends 30 to 60 minutes on the initial read; ACS AMI Associate Editors are active researchers fitting ACS AMI editorial work around their own laboratories.
ACS AMI editorial culture is decisive: immediate rejections average about 8 days. Papers that pass the ACS AMI Associate Editor screen have cleared the steepest filter in applied materials interface publishing.
ACS AMI's review pipeline
Status | What is happening | Typical duration |
|---|---|---|
Submitted | Administrative processing at ACS AMI editorial office via ACS Paragon Plus | Day 0 to 2 |
With Associate Editor | Subject expert Associate Editor evaluating desk-screen fit | Days 2 to 8 (8-day median for immediate rejection) |
EIC Consultation | Editor-in-Chief consultation for ambiguous fit | Days 3 to 7 (parallel; invisible to author) |
Under Review | External reviewers invited or actively reviewing (3 to 4 week target) | Days 8 to 49 |
Required Reviews Complete | Associate Editor synthesizing reports | 7 to 14 days |
Decision Pending | Associate Editor finalizing recommendation | 3 to 7 days |
Decision Sent | Reject, R&R, or accept | Check email |
The Associate Editor desk screen (about 30 to 40 percent rejected)
Before the paper reaches external reviewers, an ACS AMI Associate Editor evaluates whether the applied-materials interface utility warrants ACS AMI's editorial slots. About 30 to 40 percent of submissions are rejected at this stage within the 8-day median for immediate rejections. A desk rejection most often means the editor concluded that the work lacks applied interface utility, demonstrated application potential, or methodological rigor, or that the work would fit better at a sister ACS journal (ACS Nano for top-tier nanoscience, JACS for broader chemistry, ACS Applied Nano Materials for nanomaterials specialty, ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering for sustainability).
Day 0 to 2: Administrative processing
The ACS AMI editorial office confirms files are complete: manuscript with figures embedded, Supporting Information with characterization data (XRD, TEM/SEM, XPS, spectroscopy) plus application-context performance data, cover letter directed to the Associate Editor, conflict-of-interest declarations, ethics-statement documentation, and data-availability statement. Acknowledgment of submission typically occurs within a few days.
Days 2 to 8: Associate Editor desk screen (8-day median for clear rejections)
The handling Associate Editor reads the paper and evaluates applied-materials interface utility, methodological rigor, characterization data adequacy, and ACS AMI subspecialty routing. After technical checks pass, the manuscript moves to editorial review.
Days 3 to 7: EIC consultation (parallel for ambiguous cases)
In parallel with the primary Associate Editor's read, ambiguous-fit papers may be discussed with the Editor-in-Chief or peer Associate Editors. This EIC consultation runs alongside the primary read and adds 2 to 4 days to the timeline that is invisible to the author in the portal.
Days 8 to 21: External reviewer recruitment
ACS AMI Associate Editors typically invite 2 to 3 external reviewers, with reviewer recruitment typically taking 5 to 10 days. The recruitment window can take longer because reviewers with topic-matched applied-materials interface subspecialty expertise are scarce.
Days 8 to 49: Active peer review (3 to 4 week target)
Once reviewers agree to review, the typical ACS AMI peer-review cycle lasts 3 to 4 weeks per reviewer, contributing to the 1.2-month first review round median. Reviewers are asked to evaluate applied-materials interface utility, characterization data adequacy, application-context performance, and reproducibility. Reviewer reports for ACS AMI tend to be focused; 1500 to 3000 word reports are typical.
Day 49 onward: Editorial synthesis and decision
After reports return, the Associate Editor synthesizes them. The 1.7-month total handling time for accepted manuscripts reflects revision rounds and editorial discussion.
When to worry
- Rejection within 1 to 3 days: Administrative issue or immediate scope mismatch.
- Rejection within 5 to 8 days: Associate Editor desk rejection per the 8-day median.
- Still Under Review after 2 weeks: Strong signal. Paper passed the ACS AMI Associate Editor filter.
- Still Under Review after 10 weeks: Reviewer-recruitment or reviewer-report delay. A polite inquiry via the ACS Paragon Plus portal is appropriate.
- Status changes to "Decision Pending": Reports are in; expect a decision within 1 week.
"My paper has been Under Review for 5 weeks. Is that bad?"
This is the most common anxiety we hear from ACS AMI authors during the active editorial window. The honest answer: no, 5 weeks at Under Review puts you right at ACS AMI's 1.2-month first review round median. Reports may already be in editorial synthesis with the Associate Editor preparing the recommendation. Most reviewer-driven delays come from reviewer-recruitment timing for applied-materials interface subspecialty experts rather than slow reviews because ACS is generally good about enforcement of reviewer deadlines, with late reviewers getting reminders and editors usually finding replacements when reviewers go silent. If the portal still says Under Review at the 8-week mark, the most likely explanation is that one of the assigned reviewers asked for an extension and the Associate Editor granted it. This is normal practice at ACS AMI.
What you should NOT do during the 5-to-8-week window is email the editorial office. ACS AMI Associate Editors are working researchers managing 100+ active papers per year around their own laboratories; an inquiry at 5 weeks adds friction without accelerating the timeline.
What to do while waiting
- Do not email the editorial office during the first 6 weeks unless an urgent ethics issue surfaces.
- Do not submit the paper anywhere else while it is Under Review at ACS AMI. ACS has explicit prohibitions on dual submission.
- Prepare a point-by-point response template for likely reviewer concerns: applied-materials interface utility, application-context performance, characterization data adequacy, reproducibility.
- If you have related work submitted elsewhere or recently published, prepare disclosure language for when revisions are requested.
- Read recent ACS AMI papers in your subfield to calibrate the current editorial bar.
Readiness check
While you wait on ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, scan your next manuscript.
The scan takes about 1-2 minutes. Use the result to decide whether to revise before the decision comes back.
If ACS AMI rejects: sister-journal cascade with reasoning
If your ACS AMI paper is rejected after review, the natural cascade depends on what the reviewers and Associate Editor cited:
ACS Applied Nano Materials is the natural ACS cascade for nanomaterials specialty papers.
ACS Applied Energy Materials is the ACS cascade for energy-applications applied materials.
ACS Applied Bio Materials is the ACS cascade for biomedical applied materials.
JACS is the broader ACS chemistry flagship. JACS uses ACS Paragon Plus at acsparagonplus.acs.org; editorial contact jacs@acs.org.
ACS Nano is the broader ACS nanoscience flagship. ACS Nano uses ACS Paragon Plus; editorial contact nano@acs.org.
Advanced Materials Interfaces is the external Wiley applied materials interfaces cascade. Wiley uses Editorial Manager at editorialmanager.com/admi; editorial contact admi@wiley.com.
How ACS AMI compares to nearby alternatives
Feature | ACS AMI | ACS Applied Nano Materials | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Desk-rejection rate | 30 to 40 percent | 50 to 60 percent | 40 to 50 percent | 25 to 35 percent |
Desk-decision speed | 8-day median (clear rejections) | 4-day median | 8-day median | 7 to 14 days |
Total review time (post-screen) | 1.2-month first round | 1.1-month first round | 1.2-month first round | 4 to 6 weeks |
Reviewer count | 2 to 3 (3 to 4 week target) | 2 to 3 | 2 to 3 | 2 to 3 |
Peer-review model | Single-blind | Single-blind | Single-blind + two-editor scrutiny | Single-blind |
Editorial bar | Applied materials interface utility + application performance | Top-tier nanoscience + experimental validation | Top-tier ACS chemistry breadth | ACS nanomaterials specialty |
Submit if your paper passed the desk
If your ACS AMI paper is Under Review past 2 weeks, you have cleared the Associate Editor desk-screen. Use the waiting window to prepare a thorough revision response template.
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces submission readiness check takes about 5 minutes.
Think twice before assuming "Under Review" means certain acceptance
ACS AMI Associate Editors retain discretion to reject after partial review if reviewer reports surface methodological or applied-utility concerns the desk screen did not catch. The 35 to 40 percent overall acceptance rate means many post-desk-screen papers still receive a substantial-revision decision.
For a pre-upload diagnostic of applied-materials interface utility framing and application-context performance, run a ACS AMI pre-submission diagnostic before reviewer reports surface those concerns.
Last verified: ACS AMI author guidelines at researcher-resources.acs.org/publish/author_guidelines and ACS Paragon Plus documentation.
The ACS AMI reviewer experience
ACS asks reviewers at ACS AMI to evaluate four things specifically. The table below maps each to actionable preparation.
Reviewer focus area | What ACS AMI asks reviewers to evaluate | How to prepare for it |
|---|---|---|
Applied-materials interface utility | Does the work demonstrate applied interface utility (functional surface, device performance, application benchmark)? | Frame the introduction around the applied interface utility. The 8-day median for clear rejections selects for papers with clear applied utility. |
Application-context performance | Does the work include application-context performance data, not just bench-scale characterization? | Include application-context performance data (device metrics, real-world testing, performance benchmarks). |
Characterization data adequacy | Are the characterization data (XRD, TEM/SEM, XPS, spectroscopy) adequate to support the claims? | Include full characterization data in Supporting Information. Reviewers consistently flag thin or incomplete characterization. |
Reproducibility | Could another lab reproduce the central synthesis and application-context performance with the methods as written? | Use detailed experimental protocols. Include full characterization plus application performance data in Supporting Information. |
Common patterns we see that miss the ACS AMI bar
In our pre-submission work with ACS AMI-targeted manuscripts, three named patterns generate the most consistent reviewer concerns and the most common reasons papers miss the editorial bar or fail the desk screen.
Bench-scale-only framing flagged at Associate Editor screen. When the work presents bench-scale characterization without application-context performance data, ACS AMI Associate Editor desk rejection within 8 days is common. The strongest manuscripts include application-context performance data (device metrics, real-world testing, performance benchmarks).
Characterization data gaps surface as reviewer concerns. When characterization data is thin (especially missing XRD pattern indexing, absent XPS chemical-state confirmation, or thin spectroscopy validation), reviewers consistently request expanded characterization sections. The strongest revisions add complete characterization data with quantitative analysis.
ACS family cascade offers from Associate Editor. When the Associate Editor concludes the work is rigorous but the applied-interface bar of ACS AMI is not met, transfer offers to ACS Applied Nano Materials (nanomaterials specialty), ACS Applied Energy Materials (energy), or ACS Applied Bio Materials (biomedical) are common. ACS editors take these transfers seriously.
Methodology note
This page was created from ACS's public ACS AMI author guidelines at researcher-resources.acs.org/publish/author_guidelines, ACS Paragon Plus documentation (8-day median for immediate rejections, 1.2-month first review round median, 1.7-month total accepted, 3 to 4 week reviewer target with ACS enforcement, Associate Editor selection of peer-review experts), SciRev community-reported transit data on ACS AMI, and Manusights pre-submission review experience with ACS AMI-targeted manuscripts.
What to read next
For the ACS applied materials landscape beyond ACS AMI, see ACS Applied Nano Materials (nanomaterials specialty), ACS Applied Energy Materials (energy applications), ACS Applied Bio Materials (biomedical applications), JACS (broader ACS chemistry), ACS Nano (broader ACS nanoscience), and external applied materials alternatives (Advanced Materials Interfaces, Advanced Functional Materials). The choice across these titles depends on whether the central contribution is applied materials interface utility (ACS AMI), nanomaterials specialty (ACS Applied Nano Materials), energy applications (ACS Applied Energy Materials), biomedical applications (ACS Applied Bio Materials), broad ACS chemistry (JACS), broad ACS nanoscience (ACS Nano), or external applied materials (Advanced Materials Interfaces, Advanced Functional Materials).
Reviewers at ACS AMI typically draw from 2 to 3 applied-materials interface subspecialty experts. Editors screen and triage manuscripts before any external reviewer sees them, and preparing a response template that addresses both applied-utility and application-performance perspectives accelerates revision rounds substantially.
For a pre-upload check of your manuscript against the ACS AMI applied-utility-plus-application-performance bar before submission, our ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces pre-submission diagnostic flags the application and characterization weaknesses most likely to surface in reviewer reports.
Frequently asked questions
Your manuscript has cleared ACS AMI ACS Paragon Plus admin checks and is being evaluated. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces uses a traditional editorial structure where submissions go to a handling editor (usually an associate editor with relevant expertise) who decides whether to send the paper to reviewers or reject at the desk. If the editor thinks it fits scope and shows sufficient novelty, it goes to 2 to 3 external reviewers.
According to community-reported data, the first review round averages about 1.2 months, accepted manuscripts average about 1.7 months in total handling time, and immediate rejections average about 8 days. Reviewers are typically given 3 to 4 weeks, and ACS is generally good about enforcement of reviewer deadlines.
Wait at least 6 weeks before inquiring. Contact via the ACS Paragon Plus portal at acsparagonplus.acs.org referencing your manuscript ID; aami@acs.org handles editorial-office inquiries.
No. ACS AMI's 1.2-month first review round median means 5 weeks puts you right at the typical first-decision window. Reports may already be in editorial synthesis with the Associate Editor preparing the recommendation.
Your paper passed the handling Associate Editor desk screen and 2 to 3 external reviewers have been invited. ACS AMI operates single-blind peer review by default; the Associate Editor selects reviewers with topic-matched applied-materials subspecialty expertise.
Yes. The 1.2-month first review round median plus 1.7-month total handling time for accepted papers means most submissions take more than 30 days. Multiple revision rounds are common; total submission-to-acceptance commonly runs 3 to 5 months for successful papers.
Past 10 weeks is the right moment for a polite inquiry. Past 14 weeks suggests a reviewer dropped out and the Associate Editor needs a replacement. Silence in the first 6 weeks is normal at ACS AMI given the working-researcher Associate Editor model.
Sources
Best next step
Use this page to interpret the status and choose the next sensible move.
For ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, the better next step is guidance on timing, follow-up, and what to do while the manuscript is still in the system. Save the Free Readiness Scan for the next paper you have not submitted yet.
Guidance first. Use the scan for the next manuscript.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Where to go next
Same journal, next question
- ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces Review Time: Time to First Decision and Publication
- ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces Submission Process: What Happens From Upload to First Decision
- How to Avoid Desk Rejection at ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces
- Is ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces a Good Journal? Impact Factor, Scope, and Submission Guide
- ACS Applied Materials Interfaces Submission Guide (2026)
- ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces APC and Open Access: Current ACS Pricing, Discounts, and Real Options
Supporting reads
Conversion step
Use this page to interpret the status and choose the next sensible move.
Guidance first. Use the scan for the next manuscript.