Field Guide
Top Open Access & Multidisciplinary Journals
Top multidisciplinary and open access journals for broad-impact research. This guide covers 12 journals with impact factors, acceptance rates, review timelines, and open access costs - everything you need to choose the right venue for your research.
Journal Comparison Table
| Journal | Tier | Impact Factor | Acceptance Rate | Review Time | Open Access |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nature | Top Tier | 48.5 | <8% | 7 days median to first decision | See details |
| Science | Top Tier | 45.8 | <7% | ~14 days to first decision | See details |
| Nature Communications | Strong Option | 15.7 | ~20% | ~9 days to first editorial decision | See details |
| Science Advances | Strong Option | 12.5 | ~10% | 1-4 weeks to first editorial decision | See details |
| PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) PNAS | Strong Option | 9.1 | ~15% | ~45 days to first decision | See details |
| PLOS Biology PLOS Biol. | Strong Option | 7.2 | ~15-20% | ~60-90 days median | See details |
| eLife | Strong Option | N/A | ~15% | ~30 days to editorial assessment; reviewed preprints published regardless | See details |
| Scientific Reports | Accessible | 3.9 | ~57% | 21 days median to first editorial decision | See details |
| IEEE Access | Accessible | 3.6 | ~40-45% | ~30 days median to first decision | See details |
| Sensors | Accessible | 3.5 | ~50-60% | ~60-80 days median | See details |
| PLOS ONE | Accessible | 2.6 | ~31% | 40 days median to first decision | See details |
| Applied Sciences Appl. Sci. | Accessible | 2.5 | ~50-60% | ~60-90 days median | See details |
Found your target journal - now check if your manuscript is ready
Most desk rejections come down to scope and framing, not the science itself. Start with the Free Readiness Scan to check your manuscript against what open access & multidisciplinary editors actually look for before you commit to a submission.
Start with the Free Readiness Scan. Unlock the Full AI Diagnostic for $29. If you need deeper scientific feedback, choose Expert Review.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Run Free Readiness Scan βUnderstanding Journal Tiers
Tier 1 (Nature, Science): For discoveries that change how we understand the world. Written for a general scientific audience. Desk-rejected within 1-2 weeks if no broad significance. If your advisor has not published in these journals, your odds are very low.
Tier 2 (Nature Communications, Science Advances, PNAS, eLife): For strong multidisciplinary work. NC and SA are open access (~$5,600/$4,500). PNAS has two tracks - 'contributed' is more prestigious but slower. eLife focuses on rigor over perceived impact.
Tier 3 (PLOS ONE, Scientific Reports): For scientifically sound research. These journals evaluate technical validity, not importance. Higher acceptance rates, faster timelines. Both are fully open access - PLOS ONE ~$1,700, Scientific Reports ~$2,200.
Publishing in Open Access & Multidisciplinary
Multidisciplinary and open access journals occupy a unique space in scientific publishing. These venues reach the broadest audience but have different models, costs, and career implications. Nature and Science are the pinnacle of scientific publishing. Both publish across all scientific disciplines and are read by scientists far beyond your immediate field. Publication in either is a career-defining event. However, they reject over 90% of submissions - most desk-rejected within a week. Your work must have exceptional broad significance and be written for a general scientific audience. Nature Communications, Science Advances, and PNAS are the solid alternatives. Nature Communications and Science Advances are the open access "little siblings" of Nature and Science, respectively. They maintain high standards but publish more papers and have higher acceptance rates than their flagship counterparts. PNAS has a unique two-track system (contributed and direct) and is one of the oldest multidisciplinary journals. eLife is the open access revolution - no impact factor pursuit, focus on rigorous science regardless of perceived impact. It's transformed how people think about journal prestige and is increasingly respected. PLOS ONE and Scientific Reports are the most accessible open access options. They publish scientifically sound research regardless of perceived importance - a deliberate model choice. Both are fully open access with relatively fast timelines.
Guidance by Career Stage
π Graduate Students
Nature or Science as first author is extraordinarily rare. Don't aim there - it's not realistic. Build credibility through Nature Communications, Science Advances, or PNAS. PLOS ONE and Scientific Reports are fine for early-career papers but some fields don't value them highly.
π¬ Postdocs
Postdocs with exceptional data can target Nature or Science if the PI has credentials there. More realistically, aim for Nature Communications or Science Advances. eLife has become a respected venue that's more accessible than the top-tier.
π¨βπ¬ Principal Investigators
The calculus changes with seniority. PIs with strong records can target Nature/Science consistently. Consider what you want: Nature/Science for maximum visibility, Nature Communications/Science Advances for open access with strong impact, eLife for principled open science, PNAS for US academic community.
β±οΈ Review Timelines
Nature and Science: 1-2 weeks for desk decisions, 4-8 weeks for peer review, 3-6 months total for accepted papers. Nature Communications: 6-10 weeks to first decision. Science Advances: similar, 6-10 weeks. PNAS: 8-12 weeks. eLife: 4-8 weeks. PLOS ONE: 4-8 weeks. Scientific Reports: 4-8 weeks.
π Open Access & Costs
This is a key differentiator. Nature and Science are subscription with optional OA (~$11,000-15,000). Nature Communications: $5,600 (open access required for some). Science Advances: $4,500 (open access required). PNAS: ~$3,500 for open access. eLife: $2,000 (open access required). PLOS ONE: $1,700 (open access required). Scientific Reports: $2,200 (open access required).
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- βNot writing for a general scientific audience for Nature/Science
- βNot framing broad significance in the cover letter for top-tier journals
- βAssuming open access journals are 'lower quality' - eLife and PLOS ONE have rigorous peer review
- βPNAS 'direct' track has lower visibility than 'contributed' - know which you're submitting to
Frequently Asked Questions
Which multidisciplinary journal has the highest impact factor?
Nature leads at 48.5, followed by Science (45.8), then Nature Communications (15.7), Science Advances (12.5), PNAS (9.1), eLife (no IF - they rejected the metric), PLOS ONE (2.6), and Scientific Reports (3.9).
What's the difference between Nature and Nature Communications?
Nature is the flagship - far more selective (~5% acceptance), broader audience, more prestigious. Nature Communications publishes more papers, is open access, and is more accessible while still being excellent. Think of them as different tiers, not alternatives.
Is publishing in PLOS ONE or Scientific Reports bad for my career?
It depends on your field. In some fields, these journals are respected for rigorous methodology. In others, they carry less weight than traditional journals. The key is that peer review confirmed your science is sound - that's what matters most for early-career papers.
Detailed Journal Guides
Latest Journal-Specific Guides in This Field
More Guides in This Field
Related Resources
Ready to submit? Check your manuscript first.
Start with the Free Readiness Scan to review your scope, significance framing, methods, and literature coverage against open access & multidisciplinary journal standards before you submit.
Start with the Free Readiness Scan. Unlock the Full AI Diagnostic for $29. If you need deeper scientific feedback, choose Expert Review.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Run Free Readiness Scan β