Advanced Functional Materials Submission Guide: Requirements, Formatting and What Editors Want

Advanced Functional Materials, or AFM, is one of those journals where good science still gets rejected because the paper is framed like a niche materials report instead of a field-level advance. The bar is not just technical quality. It's importance, breadth, and whether the editor can explain your paper in one sharp sentence.

Submission at a glance

• Main article types: Full Papers, Communications, Reviews, Progress Reports, and other invited formats
• Abstract: Keep it compact, specific, and readable to non-specialists in adjacent materials areas
• Figures: No simple figure cap, but AFM expects polished, high-information figures with minimal clutter
• References: Wiley format, checked carefully at production stage
• Supporting Information: Extremely common, often necessary for methods, controls, extra spectra, and raw characterization
• Data statement: AFM requires a data availability statement, even when no data are openly shared
• Image integrity: Editors can request unprocessed and raw data for images

Manuscript types and limits

AFM's core submission types are Full Papers and Communications. Full Papers are complete studies with broad significance. Communications are shorter and faster, but they still need a result that feels decisive, not preliminary.

The journal also runs Reviews and Progress Reports, usually when the scope is broad and the author team has real authority in the area. Don't assume a review is easier to place. AFM reviews are heavily judged on editorial vision.

AFM does not advertise a single easy rule like "8 figures, 6,000 words" across everything. That means editors use proportion and impact as the real filter. If your communication reads like a compressed Full Paper, it feels awkward. If your Full Paper contains one small advance stretched across ten panels, it feels weak.

The smart move is simple. Choose the format that matches the maturity of the story, then cut hard until every figure earns its spot.

Cover letter expectations

Your cover letter should sound like an editor's note, not a lab report. State the central functional advance in the first two lines. Then explain why the paper matters beyond the subfield.

For AFM, that often means connecting a material or device result to a wider audience in electronics, energy, biointerfaces, optics, mechanics, or soft materials. If your letter only says the material was synthesized successfully and showed improved performance, that's not enough.

A good AFM cover letter usually names the benchmark. It tells the editor what improved, by how much, and why the mechanism is convincing. If you can only sell the paper with vague words like "promising" or "excellent," the framing isn't ready.

Formatting mistakes that get flagged

AFM is visual. If your figures are messy, the paper already feels second-tier. Common problems are tiny labels, too many inset panels, unreadable color maps, and captions that force the reader to decode the whole experiment.

Another issue is weak story order. AFM papers should not bury the headline result in Figure 5. Editors want a clean front half: concept, material, key performance, mechanism. If the paper takes too long to start, interest drops.

Authors also get in trouble when important methods are too vague. AFM papers look sleek in print, but reviewers still want full experimental detail. Put the overflow into Supporting Information, not into hand-wavy shortcuts.

Reporting, ethics, and data requirements

AFM's author guidance is explicit on data transparency. Authors must provide a data availability statement, including when and how data can be accessed, any restrictions, and whom to contact if access is controlled.

The guidance is also direct about image integrity. Submitted images must accurately reflect the original data, and editors may ask for unprocessed or raw data during review. That's a big deal for microscopy, gels, spectroscopy figures, and any heavily processed composite image.

Funding and sponsor roles should be disclosed in the methods when relevant. If a sponsor influenced study design, analysis, or manuscript preparation, say so plainly.

Supporting Information should carry the technical weight that would otherwise make the main paper bloated, full synthetic details, expanded characterization, repeatability data, extra controls, and raw-to-processed figure logic when needed.

What editors actually want

AFM editors want a paper that feels broad, clean, and ahead of the curve. "Broad" means the result matters outside your exact material class. "Clean" means the evidence chain is easy to follow. "Ahead of the curve" means the work doesn't feel like a routine incremental optimization.

They also want confidence. If the mechanism is speculative, say so carefully. If the application claim depends on one fragile device or one idealized cell, don't oversell it. AFM editors see inflated claims every day.

The papers that do well usually have a strong first figure, obvious benchmarking, and a conclusion that tells readers what changed in the field because this paper now exists.

Final pre-submit checklist

• Pick the right format, especially Full Paper versus Communication.
• Front-load the main advance in the abstract, title, and Figure 1.
• Add a data availability statement.
• Make sure raw image and source data are organized before submission.
• Move secondary characterization and detailed methods into Supporting Information.
• Use the cover letter to argue field-level significance, not just technical success.
• Check every figure for readability and visual consistency.

FAQ

Does AFM require open data?
Not always open, but it does require a data availability statement explaining access and restrictions.

Can editors ask for raw image data?
Yes. AFM's guidance says authors should provide unprocessed and raw data if requested.

Is Supporting Information optional?
For competitive AFM papers, rarely. Most strong submissions use it heavily.

Get your paper submission-ready

If you're aiming at AFM, Manusights can help you sharpen the editorial framing, tighten the figures, and make sure the story reads like a broad materials advance instead of a local optimization paper.

Sources

• Wiley, Advanced Functional Materials Author Guidelines
• Advanced journal manuscript preparation checklist
• Wiley guidance on data availability and image integrity