Journal Guide
Publishing in Science Advances: Fit, Timeline & Submission Guide
The open access arm of AAAS: rigorous multidisciplinary science with room to breathe
Should you submit here?
Submit if the journal's name is literal. Be careful if editors know when a paper was rejected by Science.
12.5
Impact Factor (2024)
~10%
Acceptance Rate
1-4 weeks to first editorial decision
Time to First Decision
Submission guide
Science Advances Submission Guide
A package-readiness guide to Science Advances covering story shape, breadth framing, cover letter logic, and what must be stable before submission.
Journal assessment
Is Science Advances a Good Journal? A Practical Fit Verdict for Authors
A practical Science Advances fit verdict for authors deciding whether their paper is broad, complete, and persuasive enough for a selective cross-field audience.
Desk rejection
How to Avoid Desk Rejection at Science Advances
How to avoid desk rejection at Science Advances: what editors screen first on breadth, rigor, and cross-disciplinary significance.
What Science Advances Publishes
Science Advances publishes significant research across all scientific disciplines as the open access companion to Science. It is not a dumping ground for Science rejects. About 80% of submissions come directly, not through transfers. The journal offers something rare at this level: flexible formatting, generous word limits, and editors who are working scientists in your field. If your research is strong, multidisciplinary, and benefits from a longer format or open access, Science Advances is a top-tier home.
- Research articles representing major advances across all areas of science
- Multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary work spanning physical, life, social, and computer sciences
- Studies that benefit from the extended format Science cannot accommodate
- High-quality research where open access matters (policy relevance, global readership, funder mandates)
- Work at the intersection of science and societal impact
Editor Insight
“Science Advances occupies a unique position: the prestige of the AAAS brand, the freedom of open access, and editors who actually do research in your field. The biggest misconception is that it is Science's consolation prize. It is not. The flexible format, the open access model, and the fact that it now receives more submissions than Science itself tell a different story. If your paper needs more than 4,500 words and 5 figures to tell properly, Science Advances may actually be the better choice, not the fallback.”
What Science Advances Editors Look For
A real advance, not just a solid study
The journal's name is literal. Editors want papers that push a field forward, not papers that confirm what we already know with slightly better data. Incremental work gets desk-rejected fast.
Appeal beyond ultra-specialists
You do not need Nature-level broad appeal, but your paper should interest scientists outside your exact subfield. If only 50 people in the world would read it, consider a specialty journal.
A clear and honest abstract
Editors form first impressions from your title, abstract, and cover letter. Overstatement kills interest immediately. Be ambitious but accurate about what you have actually shown.
Fair comparison to prior work
Editors are working scientists who know the literature. If you ignore or minimize important prior work, they will notice. Show clearly how your findings go beyond what exists.
Methodological rigor throughout
Because editors are active researchers in related fields, they can spot weak controls, inappropriate statistics, and missing validations on first read. Technical shortcuts are fatal.
Complete story, well told
Use the flexible format wisely. You have up to 15,000 words and 10 figures, but that does not mean you should use them all. Be as long as needed, not as long as allowed.
Why Papers Get Rejected
These patterns appear repeatedly in manuscripts that don't make it past Science Advances's editorial review:
Treating it as a backup for Science rejects
Editors know when a paper was rejected by Science. If you resubmit without changes, addressing previous reviewer concerns, or updating your cover letter, the paper will not move forward. The worst version: forgetting to change 'Dear Editors of Science' in your cover letter.
Overselling in the title and abstract
Editors have specifically called this out. If they need a dictionary to understand your adjectives, you have lost them. Superlatives trigger skepticism, not excitement.
Burying significance behind methods
Editors spend minutes, not hours, on initial assessment. If they cannot see why your work matters from the abstract and first impression, it gets passed over. Lead with the finding.
Poor figure quality and placement
Editors form their second impression from your figures. Submitting inscrutable figures at the end of the document, with uninformative captions, makes it hard to see the big picture.
Resubmitting a rejected paper without changes
The journal tracks near-duplicate submissions. If you were rejected and want to try again, you need significant new data and a clear explanation in your cover letter of what changed.
Suggesting conflicted reviewers
Science Advances takes conflicts of interest seriously. Suggesting close colleagues or recent coworkers will slow your paper down if conflicts are discovered after review.
Does your manuscript avoid these patterns?
The Free Readiness Scan reads your full manuscript against Science Advances's criteria and flags the specific issues most likely to cause rejection.
Insider Tips from Science Advances Authors
Editors are working scientists, not professional editors
Unlike Science or Nature, every editor at Science Advances is an active researcher. This means they know your field well, spot weaknesses quickly, and have less patience for marketing language. Write for a peer, not a gatekeeper.
The cover letter matters more than you think
Editors have said they form initial impressions from title, abstract, and cover letter text alone, sometimes without even seeing the author list. A generic cover letter wastes your best opportunity to frame the work.
Use the flexible format strategically
Science caps research articles at ~4,500 words with 4-5 figures. Science Advances gives you up to 15,000 words and 10 figures. If your story needs that space to be told properly, this is a genuine advantage over the parent journal.
Transfers from Science are not automatic acceptances
Only about 20% of submissions come through the Science transfer system. Getting a transfer offer means Science thinks the work has merit but does not fit their format or significance bar. Science Advances editors still evaluate independently and can (and do) reject transfers.
Suggest associate editors, not just reviewers
Science Advances has editorial working groups listed on their website. Suggesting an associate editor familiar with your field increases the chances of getting a fair, expert assessment on the first pass.
Grammar and presentation matter at the front door
Editors have explicitly stated that typos in the title or grammar mistakes in the abstract make them question attention to detail. They consider it a favor to reject quickly for language issues rather than let sloppy writing bias reviewers.
The APC is steep but waivers exist
At $5,000, the article processing charge is real money. But AAAS offers discounts through institutional agreements and waivers for researchers without funding. Check before assuming you cannot afford it.
Open access is the whole point
If your funder requires open access (Plan S, NIH, UKRI, etc.), Science Advances satisfies those mandates automatically. This is increasingly a practical advantage over Science itself, which is hybrid access.
The Science Advances Submission Process
Direct submission or Science transfer
Transfer offers come with Science rejectionSubmit directly through the AAAS submission system, or accept a transfer offer from Science. Transfers do not require reformatting, but updating your files and cover letter is strongly recommended. Reviews from Science may be reused to speed up evaluation.
Editorial triage
1-4 weeks (can be longer; median varies)A deputy editor reviews your submission and may send it to an associate editor with relevant expertise. Evaluation is based on title, abstract, cover letter, and figures. Most rejections happen here without external review.
Peer review
6-12 weeks typicalTypically 2-3 reviewers selected for field expertise. Reviewers assess both scientific validity and significance. Reviews tend to be detailed because editors are scientists who understand the work.
Editorial decision
1-2 weeks after reviews returnAccept, reject, or revise. Revision requests can be substantial. The handling editor may change between rounds, which can introduce inconsistency.
Revision and final decision
Total process averages ~29 weeks from submission to publicationRevised manuscripts may go back to original reviewers or be assessed by the editor. Multiple revision rounds are possible but not the norm for strong revisions.
Science Advances by the Numbers
| 2024 Impact Factor(Clarivate JCR; rising trend from 11.7 in 2022) | 12.5 |
| CiteScore(Scopus 2024) | 19.6 |
| Submissions per year | ~20,000 |
| Acceptance rate | ~10% |
| Articles published annually(Largest journal in Science family by volume) | ~2,200 |
| Average review time | ~29 weeks |
| Direct submissions(Most papers are not Science transfers) | ~80% |
| Article processing charge(Waivers and institutional discounts available) | $5,000 |
Before you submit
Science Advances accepts a small fraction of submissions. Make your attempt count.
Start with the Free Readiness Scan. Unlock the Full AI Diagnostic for $29. If you need deeper scientific feedback, choose Expert Review. The full report is calibrated to Science Advances.
Article Types
Research Article
≤15,000 words, 10 figures/tablesFull research reports presenting major advances. Flexible format is the key differentiator from Science.
Review
≤10,000 words, 10 figures/tablesthorough reviews synthesizing recent developments in a field or across disciplines
Editorial (invited only)
VariablePerspectives on major scientific issues, by invitation from editors
Landmark Science Advances Papers
Papers that defined fields and changed science:
- Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made (Geyer et al., 2017)
- Entering the sixth mass extinction (Ceballos et al., 2015)
- An integrated design and fabrication strategy for entirely soft, autonomous robots: the Octobot (Wehner et al., 2016)
- Neanderthal-Denisovan ancestors interbred with a distantly related hominin (Rogers et al., 2020)
- New tolerance factor to predict the stability of perovskite oxides and halides (Bartel et al., 2019)
Preparing a Science Advances Submission?
Get pre-submission feedback from reviewers who've published in Science Advances and know exactly what editors look for.
Run Free Readiness ScanNeed expert depth? See Expert Review Options
Primary Fields
Related Journal Guides
- Publishing in Nature
- Publishing in Science
- Publishing in Nature Communications
- Publishing in PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)
- Publishing in eLife
Latest Journal-Specific Guides
- Submission guideScience Advances Submission GuideA package-readiness guide to Science Advances covering story shape, breadth framing, cover letter logic, and what must be stable before submission.
- Journal assessmentIs Science Advances a Good Journal? A Practical Fit Verdict for AuthorsA practical Science Advances fit verdict for authors deciding whether their paper is broad, complete, and persuasive enough for a selective cross-field audience.
- Desk rejectionHow to Avoid Desk Rejection at Science AdvancesHow to avoid desk rejection at Science Advances: what editors screen first on breadth, rigor, and cross-disciplinary significance.
- Review timelineScience Advances Review Time: What Authors Can Actually ExpectScience Advances reaches first decision in 6-12 weeks for papers that pass the desk. Here's how the AAAS academic editor model affects your timeline.
More Guides for This Journal
- Acceptance rateScience Advances Acceptance Rate 2026: What ~10% Actually MeansScience Advances rejects about 90% of submissions, most without external review. Here's the full breakdown: desk rejection patterns, how long each stage takes, and what makes the ~10% that get published.
- Impact factorScience Advances Impact Factor 2026: Trend, Rankings & What Authors Need to KnowScience Advances impact factor is 12.5 in 2024. Here is the trend, the current Q1 context, and how it compares with Nature Communications and PNAS before you submit.
- Status guideScience Advances Under Evaluation: What It Means and How Long It TakesScience Advances uses 'Under Evaluation' as a broad status. The label matters less than the timing, so authors should read the wait in context instead of trying to decode a hidden message.
- Publishing costsScience Advances APC and Open Access: The Only AAAS Journal Where You Pay to PublishScience Advances charges $5,450 for gold open access. AAAS member discounts, institutional deals, and full waivers for developing nations. Complete cost guide.
- Submission processScience Advances Submission Process (2026): How To Submit And What Happens NextA workflow-focused Science Advances submission process guide covering what happens after upload, what triage is testing, and where papers lose time.
- Manuscript prepScience Advances Cover Letter: What Editors Actually Need to SeeScience Advances desk-rejects about 75% of submissions. Your cover letter is the first thing editors read. Here is how to write one that actually works.
- Publishing guideIs Science Advances Indexed in PubMed? Yes, With Later MEDLINE CoverageScience Advances is indexed in PubMed and currently indexed for MEDLINE, but the most useful part of the record is the split between its 2015 PubMed start and 2016 MEDLINE start.
Ready to submit to Science Advances?
A desk rejection costs months. Get expert feedback before you submit, from scientists who know exactly what Science Advances editors look for.
Avoid Desk Rejection
Get expert pre-submission review before you submit to Science Advances. 3-7 day turnaround.
Manuscript Rejected?
Expert revision help to strengthen your manuscript and resubmit with confidence.
Reviewer Response Help
Get expert guidance crafting your response to Science Advances reviewers.
Reference library
Compare Science Advances with the broader publishing context
This journal guide is the best starting point for Science Advances. The reference library covers the surrounding questions authors usually ask next: whether the package is ready, what drives desk rejection, how neighboring journals compare, and what the submission constraints look like across the field.
Checklist system / operational asset
Elite Submission Checklist
A flagship pre-submission checklist that turns journal-fit, desk-reject, and package-quality lessons into one operational final-pass audit.
Flagship report / decision support
Desk Rejection Report
A canonical desk-rejection report that organizes the most common editorial failure modes, what they look like, and how to prevent them.
Dataset / reference hub
Journal Intelligence Dataset
A canonical journal dataset that combines selectivity posture, review timing, submission requirements, and Manusights fit signals in one citeable reference asset.
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.
Need field-expert depth? See Expert Review Options