1. Pre-Check

Immediately after submission, the Managing Editor conducts an initial assessment to ensure:

• The manuscript aligns with the journal’s scope and standards.
• It adheres to high-quality research and ethical guidelines.
• The scientific rigor meets the journal’s criteria for further review.

The Editor-in-Chief (or an Editorial Board member, if necessary) is notified and decides whether to:

• Proceed with peer review.
• Reject the manuscript outright.
• Request revisions before peer review.

For Special Issues, Guest Editors cannot decide on their own submissions. Instead, an Editorial Board member oversees the review to maintain fairness. Similarly, Editors-in-Chief and Editorial Board members cannot access the review process of their own manuscripts beyond their role as authors.

2. Peer Review

• The journal follows a double-blind peer review, where neither authors nor reviewers know each other’s identities.
• Each manuscript undergoes evaluation by at least two independent reviewers.
• Reviewers are selected from Editorial Board members, the journal’s database or external experts identified through relevant literature searches.
• Authors may suggest potential reviewers, but the editorial team ensures no conflicts of interest.
• Authors can also request the exclusion of certain reviewers, provided it does not affect the integrity of the review process.
• Reviewers of revised manuscripts are typically given three days to submit their reports, with possible extensions upon request.

3. Revision Process

• If minor or major revisions are required, authors must resubmit their manuscript for further evaluation.
• If reviewers provide conflicting reports or if rejection is recommended, the academic editor makes the final decision.
• Revised manuscripts may or may not be sent back to reviewers, depending on their feedback preferences.
• Generally, a maximum of two rounds of major revisions is allowed before a final decision is made.

4. Editor’s Decision

• After peer review, the academic editor (Editor-in-Chief, Guest Editor, or Editorial Board member) decides.
• A minimum of two review reports is required for acceptance.

5. Production Process

• Accepted manuscripts undergo language editing, copy editing, and XML conversion by the journal’s in-house production team.
• Professional English editing is included, but authors may opt for additional editing services at their own expense if extensive editing is required.

Publication Ethics & Integrity

Advanced Materials Letters strictly follows Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, ensuring transparency, integrity, and ethical compliance in scholarly publishing.

• Plagiarism Detection: All submissions are screened using iThenticate, both during the pre-check and before final acceptance.
• Authorship Disputes: The journal adheres to COPE recommendations to resolve authorship conflicts. If all authors agree, changes can be made via a Correction Notice. Otherwise, disputes require an institutional statement confirming authorship.
• Ethical Misconduct: The journal follows COPE procedures to address unethical behavior by authors, reviewers, or editors. All editorial staff are trained to detect and handle ethical concerns.

Process Timeline

• Average time from submission to publication: 4 weeks

This efficient peer-review and production process ensures that high-quality research is published swiftly while maintaining rigorous academic standards.