Advanced Materials 'Under Review': What Each Status Means and the Wiley Transfer Option
If your Advanced Materials submission is under review, here is what each status means, the typical 4-8 week timeline, and how the Wiley transfer to sister journals works.
Senior Researcher, Oncology & Cell Biology
Author context
Specializes in manuscript preparation and peer review strategy for oncology and cell biology, with deep experience evaluating submissions to Nature Medicine, JCO, Cancer Cell, and Cell-family journals.
Next step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the guide or checklist that matches this page's intent before you ask for a manuscript-level diagnostic.
Decision cue: Advanced Materials is one of the most selective materials science journals. The desk rejection rate is high, and the editorial screen is fast. If your paper has moved to "Under Review," the in-house editors believe your materials advance is genuinely novel and has broad impact potential. That is a strong position. The review itself typically takes 4 to 8 weeks.
Check your next submission's readiness while you wait.
Advanced Materials review pipeline
Status | What is happening | Typical duration |
|---|---|---|
Received | Administrative processing | 1 to 2 days |
With Editor | In-house editor evaluating novelty and impact | 1 to 2 weeks |
Under Review | Sent to 2 to 3 expert reviewers | 3 to 6 weeks |
Decision Pending | Editor reviewing reports | 3 to 7 days |
Decision Made | Check email | Same day |
What the desk screen evaluates
Advanced Materials uses professional in-house editors who specialize in materials science. The desk decision is based on:
- Novelty: Is this a new material, a new property, or a new fabrication approach? Incremental improvements to known materials are redirected to sister journals.
- Broad impact: Does the advance matter across materials science, or only within one narrow subfield? A better thermoelectric material is interesting. A new material with fundamentally different properties that opens a new application space is more interesting.
- Characterization quality: Are the materials fully characterized? Is the performance benchmarked against the state of the art?
- Completeness: Is this a complete story, or a preliminary result that needs more work?
If your paper has passed this screen, the editors believe the novelty and impact are potentially at the Advanced Materials level.
Understanding the decision
- Accept: very rare on first round
- Minor revision: specific changes needed. Strong signal
- Major revision: substantive concerns. May require new characterization or benchmarking data. Returns to reviewers
- Reject: the novelty or impact did not meet the threshold
- Transfer: the editor suggests a Wiley Advanced Materials sister journal
The Wiley transfer system
Advanced Materials editors frequently suggest transfers to:
- Advanced Functional Materials (IF 18.5): Strong functional materials work below the Advanced Materials novelty bar. This is the most common transfer destination.
- Advanced Energy Materials (IF 24.4): Energy-focused materials research
- Advanced Science: Broader science scope
- Small (IF 13.3): Nanoscale-focused studies
- Advanced Materials Technologies: Application-focused materials work
A transfer preserves your manuscript context and sometimes reviewer reports. The receiving journal does not start from scratch. This often leads to faster publication than submitting cold to a new journal.
If an editor suggests transfer, evaluate it seriously. Advanced Functional Materials, for example, has an impact factor of 18.5 and is a strong journal in its own right. A transfer is not a rejection of the science. It is a redirection to a journal where the scope fit is better.
When to follow up
Situation | Action |
|---|---|
With Editor for 1 to 2 weeks | Normal desk review. Wait. |
Under Review for 4 weeks | Normal. Wait. |
Under Review for 6 to 8 weeks | Normal upper range. |
Under Review for 8+ weeks | Polite inquiry through the submission system is reasonable. |
What to do while waiting
- do not submit the same paper elsewhere
- prepare for reviewer requests for additional characterization, stability data, or benchmarking against newer published materials
- if you are preparing your next materials science manuscript, check its readiness in 60 seconds
Related guides
Sources
On this page
Reference library
Use the core publishing datasets alongside this guide
This article answers one part of the publishing decision. The reference library covers the recurring questions that usually come next: how selective journals are, how long review takes, and what the submission requirements look like across journals.
Dataset / reference guide
Peer Review Timelines by Journal
Reference-grade journal timeline data that authors, labs, and writing centers can cite when discussing realistic review timing.
Dataset / benchmark
Biomedical Journal Acceptance Rates
A field-organized acceptance-rate guide that works as a neutral benchmark when authors are deciding how selective to target.
Reference table
Journal Submission Specs
A high-utility submission table covering word limits, figure caps, reference limits, and formatting expectations.
Before you upload
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Move from this article into the next decision-support step. The scan works best once the journal and submission plan are clearer.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Where to go next
Start here
Same journal, next question
Conversion step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.