Journal of Physical Chemistry C 'Under Review': Status Meanings

Before the paper reaches external reviewers, a JPC C Senior Editor evaluates whether the physical chemistry insight warrants JPC C's editorial slots. About 30 to 40 percent of submissions are desk-rejected at this stage. A desk rejection most often means the Senior Editor concluded that the paper is outside the scope of the Journal, poorly written or formatted, fragmentary and marginally incremental, lacking in significance, or containing no obvious new physical insight. Common cascades: JPC A (atoms/molecules/clusters), JPC B (soft matter/biophysics), JPC Letters (rapid communications), ACS Nano (nanomaterials), JACS (broader chemistry).

The JPC C editorial office confirms files are complete: manuscript with figures embedded, Supporting Information with physical chemistry characterization data (XRD, TEM, XPS, spectroscopy), ACS template formatting, cover letter directed to the Senior Editor naming the physical chemistry insight, conflict-of-interest declarations, ethics-statement documentation, and data-availability statement. JPC C does not typically require CONSORT/STROBE/PRISMA checklists since most submissions are physical chemistry of interfaces, nanomaterials, and hard materials.

The Senior Editor reads the paper and evaluates physical chemistry insight, scope fit, methodological rigor, and JPC C subspecialty routing across nanomaterials, surfaces and interfaces, electrocatalysis, photocatalysis, and energy materials.

In parallel with the Senior Editor's primary read, ambiguous-fit papers are discussed across the ACS JPC editorial team (JPC A, JPC B, JPC C, JPC Letters share an editor team) where peer Senior Editors weigh in on whether the paper would fit better at JPC C or at sister JPC titles. This editor consultation runs alongside the desk-screen and adds 3 to 5 days to the timeline that is invisible to the author in the portal.

JPC C Senior Editors typically invite 2 to 3 reviewers with physical chemistry expertise. Reviewer recruitment typically takes 7 to 14 days.

Once 2 to 3 reviewers agree to review, the typical JPC C peer-review cycle lasts 3 to 5 weeks per reviewer, contributing to the 34.9-day median first peer review decision. Reviewers are asked to evaluate physical chemistry insight, methodological rigor, characterization adequacy, and reproducibility.

After reports return, the Senior Editor synthesizes them. It takes authors 48.4 days to get the first revision report, and it takes the editor 54.5 days to accept manuscripts. Total submission-to-acceptance median is 71.3 days; publication is fast (8.7 days from acceptance to ASAP).

• Rejection within 1 to 7 days: Administrative issue or scope mismatch (outside JPC C scope, poorly written/formatted).
• Rejection within 7 to 14 days: Senior Editor desk rejection for fragmentary/marginally incremental/lacking significance/no new physical insight.
• Still Under Review after 2 weeks: Strong signal. Paper passed the JPC C Senior Editor desk screen.
• Still Under Review after 8 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.

This is the most common anxiety we hear from JPC C authors during the active editorial window. The honest answer: no, 5 weeks at Under Review puts you right at JPC C's 34.9-day median first peer review decision. Reports may already be in editorial synthesis with the Senior Editor preparing the recommendation. Most reviewer-driven delays come from reviewer-recruitment timing for physical chemistry subspecialty experts rather than slow reviews. If the portal still says Under Review at the 7-week mark, the most likely explanation is that one of the assigned reviewers asked for an extension and the Senior Editor granted it. This is normal practice at JPC C.

What you should NOT do during the 5-to-7-week window is email the editorial office. JPC C Senior Editors are working academic physical chemists managing 80+ active papers per year around their own laboratories; an inquiry at 5 weeks adds friction without accelerating the timeline.

If your JPC C paper is rejected after review, the natural cascade depends on what the reviewers and Senior Editor cited:

JPC A is the natural ACS cascade for atoms/molecules/clusters physical chemistry.

JPC B is the ACS cascade for soft matter/biophysics physical chemistry.

JPC Letters is the ACS cascade for rapid physical chemistry communications.

ACS Nano is the ACS nanoscience cascade. ACS Nano uses ACS Paragon Plus at acsparagonplus.acs.org; editorial contact nano@acs.org.

JACS is the broader ACS chemistry flagship. JACS uses ACS Paragon Plus; editorial contact jacs@acs.org.

Nano Letters is the ACS short-format nanoscience cascade.

Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics (PCCP, RSC) is the external RSC physical chemistry cascade.

ACS asks reviewers at JPC C to evaluate four things specifically. The table below maps each to actionable preparation.

In our pre-submission work with JPC C-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.

Incremental characterization without physical insight flagged at Senior Editor desk screen. When the work presents characterization data without obvious new physical insight, JPC C desk rejection within 7 to 14 days is common (explicit Senior Editor desk-screen criterion). The strongest manuscripts frame the physical chemistry principle the findings illuminate.

Characterization data gaps surface as reviewer concerns. When characterization data is thin (especially missing XRD pattern indexing, absent XPS chemical-state confirmation, or incomplete TEM particle-size distributions), reviewers consistently request expanded characterization sections. The strongest revisions add complete characterization data with quantitative analysis.

JPC family cascade offers from Senior Editor. When the Senior Editor concludes the work is rigorous but the JPC C physical-insight bar is not met, transfer offers to JPC A (atoms/molecules/clusters), JPC B (soft matter/biophysics), JPC Letters (rapid communications), or ACS Nano (nanomaterials) are common. ACS editors take these transfers seriously.

This page was created from ACS's public JPC C author guidelines at researcher-resources.acs.org/publish/author_guidelines, ACS Paragon Plus documentation (34.9 median days to first peer review decision, 71.3 median days to acceptance, 8.7 days from acceptance to ASAP, 48.4-day first revision report, 54.5-day editor accept time, Editor-in-Chief + Deputy Editors + Senior Editors model), and Manusights pre-submission review experience with JPC C-targeted manuscripts.

For the ACS JPC landscape beyond JPC C, see JPC A (atoms/molecules/clusters), JPC B (soft matter/biophysics), JPC Letters (rapid communications), ACS Nano (nanomaterials), JACS (broader chemistry), Nano Letters (short-format nanoscience), and external physical chemistry alternatives (PCCP from RSC). The choice across these titles depends on whether the central contribution is interfaces/nanomaterials/hard materials physical chemistry (JPC C), atoms/molecules/clusters (JPC A), soft matter/biophysics (JPC B), rapid communications (JPC Letters), top nanoscience (ACS Nano), broader chemistry (JACS), short-format nanoscience (Nano Letters), or RSC physical chemistry (PCCP).

Reviewers at JPC C typically draw from 2 to 3 physical chemistry subspecialty experts. Editors screen and triage manuscripts before any reviewer sees them, and preparing a response template that addresses both physical chemistry insight and characterization adequacy accelerates revision rounds substantially.

For a pre-upload check of your manuscript against the JPC C physical-insight-plus-characterization bar before submission, our Journal of Physical Chemistry C pre-submission diagnostic flags the physical-insight framing and characterization weaknesses most likely to surface in reviewer reports.