Applied Surface Science Acceptance Rate
Applied Surface Science acceptance rate is about 19%. Use it as a selectivity signal, then sanity-check scope, editorial fit, and submission timing.
Journal evaluation
Want the full picture on Applied Surface Science?
See scope, selectivity, submission context, and what editors actually want before you decide whether Applied Surface Science is realistic.
What Applied Surface Science's acceptance rate means for your manuscript
Acceptance rate is one signal. Desk rejection rate, scope fit, and editorial speed shape the realistic path more than the headline number.
What the number tells you
- Applied Surface Science accepts roughly ~40-50% of submissions, but desk rejection accounts for a disproportionate share of early returns.
- Scope misfit drives most desk rejections, not weak methodology.
- Papers that reach peer review face a higher bar: novelty and fit with editorial identity.
What the number does not tell you
- Whether your specific paper type (review, letter, brief communication) faces the same rate as full articles.
- How fast you will hear back — check time to first decision separately.
- What open access publishing will cost if you choose that route.
Quick answer: Applied Surface Science currently reports a 19% acceptance rate on its Elsevier insights page. That is a real official signal, and it is lower than many authors assume. The better planning question is still whether the paper is truly surface-led and whether the result depends on atomic- or molecular-level surface evidence rather than on generic materials characterization.
The Applied Surface Science journal page is the best cluster reference if you want to compare this acceptance-rate question against impact factor, APC, and review-time context.
Applied Surface Science acceptance-rate context at a glance
Metric | Current figure | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
Official acceptance rate | 19% | Current journal-reported selectivity signal |
Impact factor (2024) | 6.9 | Strong Q1 applied-surface-science position |
CiteScore | 13.4 | Strong Scopus-side support |
Submission to first decision | 9 days | Very fast initial triage |
Submission to decision after review | 32 days | Efficient review cycle |
Submission to acceptance | 69 days | Useful benchmark for planning |
APC (optional OA) | USD 4,210 | Cost decision is separate from fit |
That table gives the real answer. Applied Surface Science is not just a broad, high-volume materials journal with a surface label. A 19% acceptance rate means the fit screen is substantial.
Longer-term metrics context
Year | Impact factor |
|---|---|
2017 | 4.4 |
2018 | 5.2 |
2019 | 6.0 |
2020 | 6.7 |
2021 | 7.3 |
2022 | 7.0 |
2023 | 6.7 |
2024 | 6.9 |
The 2024 impact factor increased from 6.7 in 2023 to 6.9 in 2024. That is a useful reminder that the journal is still performing strongly in its niche even after the broader post-surge normalization phase.
How Applied Surface Science compares with nearby journals
Journal | Acceptance signal | IF (2024) | Secondary metrics signal | Best fit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Applied Surface Science | 19% official | 6.9 | CiteScore 13.4, fast triage | Surface-led applied physics and chemistry |
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces | More selective on novelty | 8.2 | Higher prestige ceiling | Broader applied materials stories |
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science | More selective | 9.7 | Stronger interface-science positioning | Colloid/interface-first work |
Surface and Coatings Technology | Broader soundness lane | 4.5 | More coatings-specific | Coatings and engineering applications |
Langmuir | Different scope and prestige mix | 4.2 | Surface chemistry core audience | Surface chemistry and soft interfaces |
This is the real fit distinction: Applied Surface Science is strongest when the surface or interface itself is the scientific driver, not when it is only supporting evidence for a broader materials story.
What the acceptance-rate question really means here
For this journal, the acceptance-rate query is really standing in for a sharper question:
Is the paper genuinely surface science at the atomic or molecular level, or is it a broader materials paper with surface characterization attached?
That is the question authors should answer first.
What the 19% rate tells you:
- the desk and review filters are real
- simply having surface characterization is not enough
- the journal is more selective than many authors assume
What it does not tell you:
- whether the surface evidence actually explains the function
- whether another materials or coatings journal is a better fit
- whether the characterization depth matches the claim
What Applied Surface Science editors are actually screening for
The official author guidance is unusually explicit. The journal says the work must be a research study on the atomic and molecular level of material properties determined with specific surface approaches, and that papers outside that bar will not be sent for peer review.
That gives you a very practical screen:
- Is the paper operating at the surface or interface level rather than mainly in the bulk?
- Does the surface evidence explain the function?
- Is the mechanism specific enough to matter scientifically, not just descriptively?
- Would the paper be materially weaker if the surface data were removed?
If the answer to the last question is no, the fit is weak.
Readiness check
See how your manuscript scores against Applied Surface Science before you submit.
Run the scan with Applied Surface Science as your target journal. Get a fit signal alongside the IF context.
What we see in pre-submission review work
In our pre-submission review work, Applied Surface Science rejections usually cluster around three patterns.
The surface story is decorative, not causal. The paper may have strong SEM, XPS, or AFM, but the functional claim does not really depend on the surface findings. Reviewers catch this quickly.
The mechanism is too thin for the confidence of the claim. A paper shows a surface modification and an improved output, but the link between the two is asserted rather than demonstrated.
The manuscript is actually a different journal's paper. Some coating, catalysis, or general materials papers can be made to sound surface-adjacent. But if the core audience is somewhere else, Applied Surface Science is a difficult target.
That is why the journal's official acceptance rate is helpful but not sufficient. The decisive issue is usually whether the science is surface-led in a credible way.
The better submission question
For Applied Surface Science, the better decision question is:
Is the surface or interface the scientific engine of the result, and is the evidence specific enough at the atomic or molecular level to justify that claim?
If yes, the 19% acceptance rate is a serious but realistic hurdle. If no, the number is not the main problem.
Submit if / Think twice if
Submit if:
- the surface or interface is central to the mechanism
- the paper genuinely works at the atomic or molecular level of the surface problem
- the characterization package explains the function rather than just illustrating it
- the audience is surface-science readers rather than a broader materials audience
Think twice if:
- the surface data is supporting evidence for a bulk materials story
- the mechanism is still mostly asserted rather than shown
- a coatings, catalysis, or broader materials journal is the more honest fit
- the paper would read almost the same without the surface section
Practical verdict
The official answer is straightforward: Applied Surface Science currently reports a 19% acceptance rate.
The useful answer is:
- the journal is materially selective
- the current metrics show a strong, fast-moving venue
- the real editorial screen is whether the result is authentically surface-led
If you want a reviewer-style read on whether the paper actually behaves like an Applied Surface Science paper before upload, an Applied Surface Science submission readiness check is the best next step.
Frequently asked questions
Applied Surface Science currently reports a 19% acceptance rate on its Elsevier insights page. That is a live official figure and more useful than broad rumor-based estimates.
Whether the manuscript is genuinely surface-led. The journal's own author note says the work must operate at the atomic or molecular level of material properties using specific surface approaches.
Applied Surface Science currently reports a 2024 impact factor of 6.9, a CiteScore of 13.4, 9 days to first decision, 32 days to decision after review, and roughly 69 days to acceptance.
Applied Surface Science wants the surface or interface to be the scientific engine of the result, not just a characterization layer attached to a bulk materials paper.
A paper with strong materials or application content but a weak surface-science mechanism. If the paper would say almost the same thing without the surface data, the fit is usually weak.
Sources
Before you upload
Want the full picture on Applied Surface Science?
Scope, selectivity, what editors want, common rejection reasons, and submission context, all in one place.
These pages attract evaluation intent more than upload-ready intent.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Where to go next
Start here
Same journal, next question
- Is Applied Surface Science a Good Journal? Impact, Scope, and Fit
- Applied Surface Science Submission Guide: Format, Scope & Editor Tips
- Applied Surface Science Review Time: What Authors Can Actually Expect
- How to Avoid Desk Rejection at Applied Surface Science
- Applied Surface Science Impact Factor 2026: 6.9 - High-Volume Materials Journal
- Is Your Paper Ready for Applied Surface Science? The Surface Relevance Test
Supporting reads
Want the full picture on Applied Surface Science?
These pages attract evaluation intent more than upload-ready intent.