Is ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces a Good Journal? Impact Factor, Scope, and Submission Guide
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces (IF 8.2) is the biggest volume ACS journal in materials. This guide covers its application-first editorial test, APC, and how it compares to ACS Nano and Advanced Functional Materials.
Senior Scientist, Materials Science
Author context
Specializes in manuscript preparation for materials science and nanoscience journals, with experience targeting Advanced Materials, ACS Nano, Nano Letters, and Small.
Journal fit
See whether this paper looks realistic for ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces.
Run the Free Readiness Scan with ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces as your target journal and see whether this paper looks like a realistic submission.
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces at a glance
Key metrics to place the journal before deciding whether it fits your manuscript and career goals.
What makes this journal worth targeting
- IF 8.2 puts ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces in a visible tier — citations from papers here carry real weight.
- Scope specificity matters more than impact factor for most manuscript decisions.
- Acceptance rate of ~~25-30% means fit determines most outcomes.
When to look elsewhere
- When your paper sits at the edge of the journal's stated scope — borderline fit rarely improves after submission.
- If timeline matters: ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces takes ~~30 day. A faster-turnaround journal may suit a grant or job deadline better.
- If OA is required: gold OA costs $3,500 USD. Check institutional agreements before submitting.
How to read ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces as a target
This page should help you decide whether ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces belongs on the shortlist, not just whether it sounds impressive.
Question | Quick read |
|---|---|
Best for | ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces is one of the most widely read journals in materials science and. |
Editors prioritize | Strong application connection - not just interesting materials |
Think twice if | Claiming application relevance without actual device or system testing |
Typical article types | Article, Letter, Review |
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces (ACS AMI) is one of the most-submitted-to journals in materials science. With an IF of 8.2, CiteScore of 14.3, and over 5,000 papers published per year, it is the workhorse of the ACS materials portfolio. But the name contains an editorial test that many authors miss.
ACS AMI at a glance
Metric | Value |
|---|---|
Impact Factor (2024 JCR) | 8.2 |
CiteScore (2024) | 14.3 |
Publisher | American Chemical Society |
APC (gold OA) | ~$5,000 |
Subscription publication | Free to author (with ACS institutional access) |
Acceptance rate | ~20-25% |
Annual volume | 5,000+ papers/year |
Quartile | Q1 in Materials Science, Multidisciplinary |
Scope | Energy, bio, sensors, coatings, electronics, catalysis, interfaces |
The editorial test most authors miss
The word "applied" in ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces is not decorative. It is the editorial filter.
ACS AMI wants papers where the material or interface is tested in a real application context - a device, a system, a prototype, a measurable performance outcome. The complete chain looks like this:
Material design → Structure characterization → Property measurement → Application/device performance
Papers that stop at step 3 (interesting material, good characterization, no application testing) are the most common desk rejections. The editors have seen thousands of papers that say "this material has potential applications in..." without ever testing those applications. That framing is a red flag at ACS AMI.
The distinction is concrete. A paper that synthesizes a new electrode material and measures its electrochemical properties is a Chemistry of Materials paper. The same material integrated into a full battery cell with cycling data, rate performance, and comparison against commercial baselines is an ACS AMI paper.
How ACS AMI compares to realistic alternatives
Feature | ACS AMI | ACS Nano | Adv. Funct. Mater. | Chemistry of Materials | J. Mater. Chem. A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IF (2024) | 8.2 | 16.1 | 19.0 | 7.2 | 10.7 |
CiteScore | 14.3 | 25.4 | 28.2 | 12.0 | 17.4 |
Editorial emphasis | Application performance | Nanoscale science | Function-driven materials | Chemistry-driven design | Energy/sustainability materials |
APC (OA) | ~$5,000 | ~$5,000 | ~$5,450 | ~$5,000 | ~$2,500 |
Acceptance rate | ~20-25% | ~15% | ~15-20% | ~20% | ~20-25% |
Annual volume | 5,000+ | ~2,500 | ~2,000 | ~1,200 | ~2,500 |
Four comparisons that matter:
ACS AMI vs. ACS Nano: ACS Nano wants fundamental nanoscale insight. ACS AMI wants application proof. If your paper's main contribution is showing that a material works in a device context, ACS AMI is the better fit even if the material happens to be nanoscale.
ACS AMI vs. Advanced Functional Materials: AFM (IF 19.0) is more selective and favors papers where the function itself is the novelty. ACS AMI is stronger when the novelty is in the application engineering - making a known class of materials work better in a specific context.
ACS AMI vs. Chemistry of Materials: Chemistry of Materials is the right home when the story is about understanding why a material has certain properties. ACS AMI is right when the story is about what those properties do in practice.
ACS AMI vs. J. Mater. Chem. A: JMCA (IF 10.7) focuses specifically on energy and sustainability applications. If your application is energy-related, JMCA can be a higher-IF alternative. ACS AMI has broader scope and a larger readership across all application areas.
Submit if
- Your paper includes real device, system, or prototype testing - not just material characterization with an "applications" paragraph
- The structure-property-application chain is complete and the application data are the strongest part of the paper
- You have quantitative benchmarking against literature baselines or commercial references
- The work spans a broad enough application area that the ACS AMI readership (energy, bio, electronics, sensors, coatings) will engage with it
- You can explain in one sentence what the material does in practice, not just what it is
Journal fit
See whether this paper looks realistic for ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces.
Run the scan with ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces as the target. Get a manuscript-specific fit signal before you commit.
Think twice if
- The paper is really a materials synthesis story with application testing added as an afterthought - reviewers at ACS AMI catch this consistently
- Your benchmarking compares against weak or outdated baselines rather than current state-of-the-art
- The application claim is aspirational ("this material could potentially be used for...") rather than demonstrated
- The paper would be stronger if the application data were removed and the fundamental materials science were the focus - that signals Chemistry of Materials or a similar venue
- The $5,000 APC is a budget constraint and the paper could also fit at a lower-cost journal like JMCA or Nanoscale
What a strong ACS AMI paper looks like
The pattern is consistent across the journal's highest-cited papers:
- Title states the application, not just the material ("High-Performance Flexible Supercapacitor Based on..." not "Synthesis and Characterization of...")
- Abstract leads with what the device/system achieves, then explains why the material enables it
- Figures include application testing - device I-V curves, system efficiency plots, cycling stability, real-world condition testing
- Benchmarking table compares performance against 5-10 recent literature examples with the same application
- Mechanism section explains why the material-interface design drives the performance improvement
Papers that invert this order - leading with synthesis, burying application data in supplementary materials - get filtered early.
The volume question
ACS AMI publishes over 5,000 papers per year. Some authors worry this dilutes visibility. The counterargument: ACS AMI's CiteScore (14.3) is very high for its IF band, meaning papers in the journal do get cited. The large volume actually means the journal has dedicated sub-communities in energy, biomaterials, sensors, and electronics who actively read it. Your paper's visibility depends more on its application relevance than on the journal's total output.
Bottom line
ACS AMI is one of the best journals in materials science for application-proven work. The editorial test is simple but strict: does the paper demonstrate that a material or interface performs in a real application? If yes, and the benchmarking is honest, ACS AMI is a strong Q1 target. If the application is aspirational, a fundamental materials journal is the more honest choice.
Not sure whether your application data are strong enough for ACS AMI? An ACS AMI application chain and benchmarking check can evaluate your benchmarking, flag gaps in the application chain, and suggest better-fit alternatives if needed.
- ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces journal profile, Manusights.
Frequently asked questions
Yes. ACS AMI is a Q1 materials science journal with an IF of 8.2 and CiteScore of 14.3. It is the highest-volume ACS journal in the materials space, publishing over 5,000 papers per year. The journal is respected for application-driven materials work where real device or system performance is demonstrated.
The APC for ACS AMI is approximately $5,000 for gold open access. Subscription-model publication (no OA) is available at no charge to the author if the institution has an ACS subscription. Some ACS Read + Publish agreements cover OA APCs institutionally.
The word 'applied' in the journal name is the editorial test. ACS AMI wants papers that demonstrate a real application, device consequence, or system-level performance change - not just a new material with promising properties. The structure-property-application chain must be complete.
ACS Nano (IF 16.1) is substantially more selective and favors nanoscale science with fundamental novelty. ACS AMI (IF 8.2) is the right home when the main contribution is proving that a material or interface works in a real application context, even if the material itself is not fundamentally new at the nanoscale.
ACS AMI has an acceptance rate of approximately 20-25%. Despite publishing 5,000+ papers per year, the journal maintains a consistent editorial screen. The most common rejection reason is papers that claim an application in the title but only demonstrate material synthesis and basic characterization.
Sources
- 1. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces journal homepage, ACS Publications.
- 2. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces author guidelines, ACS Publications.
- 3. Clarivate Journal Citation Reports (released June 2025).
Final step
See whether this paper fits ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces.
Run the Free Readiness Scan with ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces as your target journal and get a manuscript-specific fit signal before you commit.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Where to go next
Same journal, next question
- ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces Submission Guide
- How to Avoid Desk Rejection at ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces
- ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces Review Time: Time to First Decision and Publication
- ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces Acceptance Rate 2026: How Hard Is It to Get Published?
- ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces Impact Factor 2026: Ranking, Quartile & What It Means
- Advanced Materials vs ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces: Journal Comparison 2026
Supporting reads
Conversion step
See whether this paper fits ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.