X
My Account Submit My Manuscript
Letpub, Scientific Editing Services, Manuscript Editing Service

ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA

   For Publishers  New

Browse Journals by Title


Journal name:   ISSN:   Subject area:   IF range: -
Index:   Category:   Open Access:   Sort by:
Journal Cover Design
FREE Webinar: Understanding Research Metrics: What Really Matters?

[ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA]Hello, you are Visitor Number 303400 on this page.

Journal Profile
Journal TitleELECTROCHIMICA ACTA
Journal Title AbbreviationsELECTROCHIM ACTA
ISSN0013-4686
h-index211
CiteScore
CiteScoreSJRSNIPCiteScore Rank
10.001.4671.218
Subject fieldQuartilesRankPercentile
Category: Chemical Engineering
Subcategory: General Chemical Engineering
Q115 / 281
Category: Chemical Engineering
Subcategory: Electrochemistry
Q12 / 37

Self-Citation Ratio (2019-2020)10.10%
Official Websitehttp://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/205/description#description
Online Manuscript Submissionhttps://www.editorialmanager.com/ELECTACTA
Open AccessNo
PublisherPERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD, THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD, ENGLAND, OX5 1GB
Subject AreaEngineering
Country/Area of PublicationENGLAND
Publication FrequencyBiweekly
Year Publication Started1959
Annual Article Volume2225
Indexing (SCI or SCIE)Science Citation Index
Science Citation Index Expanded
Link to PubMed Central (PMC)https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nlmcatalog?term=0013-4686%5BISSN%5D
Average Duration of Peer Review *Authorized Data from Publisher:
Data from Authors: About 1.9 month(s)
Competitiveness *Data from Authors: 90%
Data from Elsevier: 30%
Online Article Publication TimeData from Elsevier: Average 3.4 Week(s)
Useful Links
Relevant Journals 【ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA】CiteScore Trend
Comments from Authors
*All review process metrics, such as acceptance rate and review speed, are limited to our user-submitted manuscripts. As such they may not reflect the journals' exact competitiveness or speed.
  • Journals in the Same Subject Area
  • CiteScore Trend


First    Previous    1    2    3    4    5    6    7    Next    Last  (To Page
/7)
  Reviews on ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA: Write a review
Author: bohemian


Subject Area: Engineering
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2020-08-07 18:45:11
Submitted on February 25, 2020 and under review on March 1. We waited a long time for 2 months, and when I was preparing to urge the manuscript, I received the review comments on May 7. It turned out that the editor sent the review comments of other people's articles to me. I wrote to the editor the same day to explain the situation, and it was under review again that night. I was worried that it could be another long wait. Fortunately, the editor sent me the correct review comments two days later, and explained the reason for the 2-month review cycle was that one of the reviewers has not been reached, and the email reminder has not been responded. In the end, only one reviewer’s opinion was returned. A minor revision was required for changing the format and title. I finally got the luck at the right time. Returned on May 11 and accepted on May 14. They sent the copyright agreement on May 21, and the proof on May 26. Then it was online on May 31. What I want to say is that sometimes EA does have a review cycle of more than two months. I have encountered this several times. So it's best to go to EA's official website to see how long the average cycle is for the recently published articles. The data in LetPub is for reference only.

(7) Thank | bohemian

Author: 往上走


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 6.0 month(s)
Result: Rejected


Write a review

Reviewed 2019-12-20 19:09:06
With the thankful thing that the associate editor was downgraded to Q2, let me talk about my submission experience. After submitting the manuscript, it took three and a half months for the first review, and the comments finally came back. There were four reviewers in total. Three reviewers’ comments came back and all were positive. However, one of the reviewers was a freak who didn’t understand my article according to his comments. I verified and supplemented the data for a month. Two months after return, the freak reviewer was still not satisfied without reason two months after returning the manuscript. In the end, the fucking editor rejected it. It took full six months. This editor is too terrible. I will never submit to this junk journal in the future. It was really pleasant that this journal dropped to Q2.

(85) Thank | 往上走

Author: asdfdsa


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2019-07-30 09:43:22
Let’s write about my review process. I used to think that EA reviewed the manuscripts quickly before submitting. Now, looking at my submission process and everyone’s, I feel that it is really slow, and my love for EA has dropped a lot. It’s better not to submit to it again. It’s too slow. 2019.6.10 submitted to the journal; 2019.7.1 under review; 2019.7.6 under editor evaluation; 2019.7.14 under editor evaluation; 2019.7. 30 Still under evaluation. I don’t know what exactly the editors are doing.

(7) Thank | asdfdsa

Author: shiny001


Subject Area: Physics
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2019-05-20 17:35:48
February 7: Submitted the article. March 17: Made reply to the first review comments. April 15: first revision resubmitted. April 30: The time of under review was changed. May 17: The time of under review was changed again. I'm tired and exhausted, because the college requires more than two articles to get the master’s degree. I'm waiting for the second article, or I cannot get my job. The college requires the submission of a degree application on May 31. I hope everyone can cheer me up! Hope I can get my degree successfully! I will definitely come back to reciprocate!

(36) Thank | shiny001

Author: andersonyi@613.com


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2015-06-22 15:00:36
3 reviewers. High requirement for innovation. Be very detailed and careful in your replies.

(0) Thank | andersonyi@613.com

Author: Anjun Hu


Subject Area: Engineering
Duration of Peer Review: 5.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2019-01-30 09:50:51
Just received an EA, minor repair, received the same day after the select, and published online the third day.Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013468619301902Title: Three-dimensional CoNi2S4 nanorod arrays anchored on carbon textiles as an integrated cathode for high-rate and long-life Lithium−Oxygen battery
Show Review in Original Language
(5) Thank | Anjun Hu

Author: 迷失之城


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-11-15 17:33:30
8.29 submitted to the journal9.2 under review (I am very happy to send the review, I have rejected several 2 districts before being rejected)10.2 under editor evaluation10.2 revise (two reviewers, one six, one five questions, not too difficult, mainly to answer questions and quote references
 Dedicated to the main, supplement 2 experiments, all given overhaul)10.26 submitted to the journal (it is not easy to change, mainly because there is a problem that needs to measure eis after 200 laps)10.26 under review (2 hours after submission, it will be submitted for review, the editor is really awesome!)11.12 Required reviews completed11.15 acceptThanks to the reviewer, thanks to the editor Rüdiger Kötz, Dr. Thanks to the teacher for the modification, thanks to the lab teacher Shimei
Show Review in Original Language
(15) Thank | 迷失之城

Author: 迷失之城


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-11-12 19:51:30
Reworked for 16 days, or under review I hope that the editor will receive it. Waiting for the doctor to apply
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 迷失之城

Author: 迷失之城


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-11-04 20:01:36
8.29 Submitted to the journal9.2 under review (I am very happy to send the review, I have rejected several 2 districts before being rejected)10.2 under editor evaluation10.2 revise (two reviewers, one six, one five questions, not too difficult, mainly to answer questions and quote references
 Dedicated to the main, supplement 2 experiments, all given overhaul)10.26 submitted to the Journal (it is not easy to change, mainly because there is a problem that needs to measure EIS after 200 laps)10.26 under review (2 hours after submission, it will be submitted for review, the editor is really awesome!)11.4 under review (Returning for 10 days has no results, just hope to receive it earlier, after all, graduate this year, the third article, waiting for the doctor to use it!)I hope I can receive, pray for blessings, and pick up the character. I hope my information can help others!
Show Review in Original Language
(9) Thank | 迷失之城

Author: rezheng2009


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-08-04 21:21:27
Contribution to No. 5.29 of 20186.6 for reviewReturn to opinion on No. 26.26, a major repair, a minor repair, the editor will return after the modification of 7.267.24 return, carefully revised the comments of the first person, in fact, very good change,The second person ran a train full of five questions, most of which were not related to the paper, or carefully explained;7.27 waiting for editing message8.24 accept
Show Review in Original Language
(2) Thank | rezheng2009

Author: 123


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-08-01 19:55:30
4.27 Submission7.2 Return to the opinion, a minor repair overhaul7.26 Modifying responsesI look forward to a good result...
Show Review in Original Language
(2) Thank | 123

Author: rzzheng2009


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-07-27 22:20:30
Contribution to No. 5.29 of 20186.6 for reviewReturn to opinion on No. 26.26, a major repair, a minor repair, the editor will return after the modification of 7.267.24 return, carefully revised the comments of the first person, in fact, very good change,The second person ran a train full of five questions, most of which were not related to the paper, or carefully explained;7.27 is waiting for the edit message
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | rzzheng2009

Author: 763764784@qq.com


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-07-21 11:21:18
First throw jps, tragedy after 15 days.Then submitted ea1 month for review comments, three reviewers for one, one for four questions, one for 16 questionsThe modification was quite smooth and was thrown out after 7 days.Then I waited for 15 days. The second revision is the old iron of 16 problems. I am doing a positive electrode material and let me go to shoot Li dendrites.Fortunately, Tsinghua has a frozen field launch, and the appointment has been waiting for 8 days...After 10 days, the second repair was made.After 12 days accept2 months and 15 days before and afterNow do a certain kind of material can no longer pay attention to individual things, to have a system awareness, cheer friends ~
Show Review in Original Language
(8) Thank | 763764784@qq.com

Author: xiefengyan517@163.com


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 6.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-07-20 11:34:27
Submitted for six months, no news, crying.
Show Review in Original Language
(4) Thank | xiefengyan517@163.com

Author: 1050093907@qq.com


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-07-11 10:30:36
After receiving the draft, I received the review comments one month later.After a long wait for two months, I received the
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 1050093907@qq.com

Author: 浅浅and蓝蓝


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 5.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-07-03 10:29:27
2.21 Submitted to the Journal2.21 With Editor3.13 Under Review3.27 Under Editor Evaluation4.15 Revise5.10 April Submitted to Journal5.20 Under Review6.20 Revise6.25 Revision Submitted to Journal7.02 AcceptEditor: Aicheng Chen, PhD.It took about five months to include it. In general, I would like to thank Dr. Chen.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 浅浅and蓝蓝

Author: houhuilin86@163.com


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-06-24 19:02:16
The first EA in life, submitted for 40 days to receive review comments, one overhauled a rejection, the editor gave a chance to re-submit, we added to the reviewer's commentsThe experiment, carefully answering each question, re-submited in EA ten days later, and soon sent it to the reviewer, or sent it to the reviewer who refused the draft. After a long forty days of waiting, the review comments returned, this reviewThe person was very satisfied with the manuscript we revised. We only raised one question and minor repairs. We responded quickly and returned on the same day. The editor directly accepted it three days later.Thanks to the editor of Sotiris Sotiropoulos, the people are very good, and thanks to the help of the reviewers, the paper has been greatly improved.
Show Review in Original Language
(3) Thank | houhuilin86@163.com

Author: 764919513@qq.com


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-06-20 19:30:30
Three months after the submission, the results of the preliminary examination were given. A minor repair was overhauled, and it was repaired after one month. The third day was directly accepted.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 764919513@qq.com

Author: ztghjs


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-06-20 19:29:07
Three months after the submission, the results of the preliminary examination were given. A minor repair was overhauled, and it was repaired after one month. The third day was directly accept.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | ztghjs

Author: 打屁屁


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Rejected


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-06-20 13:43:14
Two reviewers, one refused a major repair.Many opinions are also very pertinent.Although there is a suspected shabu-shabu, I still want to vomit the person who refused to draft the man. I personally feel that he may be in the direction of the lithium battery. Basically, he does not see the analysis of other batteries, so he refused to submit the manuscript.I am really convinced of the overhaul opinion, and it is very valuable, but I have nothing to say about rejecting the draft.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 打屁屁

Author: cyxlll


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-05-24 22:51:35
Lithium battery positive, three reviewers, the first reviewer compares two, let me make up the synchrotron radiation experiment, think that the coating amount is low, to increase the coating amount to 10-20%, rejected.The second and third reviewers gave a firm opinion on the paper.The editor directly ignores the first reviewer and may be more optimistic about my article, saying that let me pay attention to the first reviewer.After repairing it a month later, I thought it would be submitted for trial. I didn't expect to give it to the editor directly.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | cyxlll

Author: cyxll


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-05-24 10:41:09
very efficient, submitted to return comments for about 25 days, 3Reviewer, 1 refused, 2 repaired, edited to repair.The problem is relatively pertinent, and I am going back after a month. I thought it would be sent to the trial. I didn’t expect to accept the
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | cyxll

Author: dadada


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Rejected


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-05-14 13:35:36
5 reviewers, one reviewer said the article is very good,Each of them raises some questions, one of which is compared with other documents. The other two require explanation in detail. There are not many problems, but the last one is directly rejected. The reason is that there is no innovation.Then gave a bunch of unfounded guesses, and the result was edited to refuse... I don’t understand where some of the reviewers are now, Xinsai
Show Review in Original Language
(4) Thank | dadada

Author: dadada


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Rejected


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-05-14 13:35:15
5 reviewers, one reviewer said the article is very good, and each has some questions, one of which requiresCompared with other literatures, the other two explanations in the article require explain in details. There are not many problems. They are minor problems, but the last reviewer directly refuses. The reason is that there is no innovation, and then a bunch of themselves are given.According to the guess, the result editor refused... I don’t understand where some reviewers are now, Xinsai
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | dadada

Author: happy


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Rejected


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-05-07 17:18:00
The next day, the submission will be submitted immediately, and the review will be about 40 days, two reviewers.A direct rejection of the manuscript, but did not put forward any constructive opinions, do not understand why the direct rejection, the second person minor repair, the editor directly rejected the draft....
Show Review in Original Language
(1) Thank | happy

First    Previous    1    2    3    4    5    6    7    Next    Last  (To Page
/7)

Start your review of [ELECTROCHIMICA ACTA]:





Disclaimer: All information sourced directly from the journals is subject to change. Please use the journal homepage link to verify all information prior to submission.


© 2010-2021  ACCDON LLC 400 5th Ave, Suite 530, Waltham, MA 02451, USA
PrivacyTerms of Service