[Back to list of manuscript types]
Referees should give an overall recommendation as to whether a manuscript should be published without, with minor, or with major alterations, or should be rejected.
Minor alterations include:
Major alterations include:
Manuscripts that require major alterations will usually be re-evaluated by the referee(s).
Manuscripts that cannot be accepted for publication in
ChemNanoMat could perhaps be acceptable after minor or major
improvements—either without further refereeing at all or
after further refereeing by the same referees—for publication
in one of ChemNanoMat's sister journals.
In the event of rejection, referees can recommend a different journal under "5. Please indicate which other journal you consider more appropriate". This procedure should have benefits for both Authors and Reviewers by facilitating the publication process.
To help us assess the paper we request that you answer the following questions:
The judgment of the importance of a paper is to a certain extent
subjective. Please note, we are asking for an evaluation of the
importance only with regard to publication in ChemNanoMat.
Thus, a paper can be considered to be very important or important
for a broad and heterogeneous readership and is thus suitable for
publication in ChemNanoMat. A highly specialized paper might
not be important for ChemNanoMat but only for a specific
area of materials chemistry.
Based on our experience, we anticipate that:
The top 10% of the submitted manuscripts are very important:
Another 20% of the submitted manuscripts are important:
Is all relevant prior work cited and discussed? Or has relevant prior work been overlooked or not discussed appropriately? Does the manuscript include many papers with low relevance to the current study?
Full Papers have no length restrictions. However, the space should be used thoughtfully and economically (e.g., additional experimental data should be placed in the Supporting Information).
Assumptions and hypotheses brought forward in a manuscript must be in accord with the experimental and/or theoretical results. All new compounds and materials must be fully characterized by appropriate analytical methods. These data should be given in the Supporting Information in the event that they exceed the scope of the Experimental Section.
In the event that the work is considered more suitable for publication elsewhere, referees can recommend, for example:
If you have information that is relevant to the comments and recommendation you have made, this can be sent either as an attachment for the Handling Editor or for the Author. Where the attachment is for the Author, please ensure that any formulations or file information will not give away your identity.
Full Papers present results of experimental or theoretical studies of general interest or great importance to the development of a specific area of research. Full Papers, which generally contain an Experimental Section and/or Computational Methods, have no length restrictions. However, the space should be used thoughtfully and economically (e.g., additional experimental data should be placed in the Supporting Information). ChemNanoMat does not publish Full Papers that consist mainly of results reported in previous Communications with an added experimental section. Full Papers require an Abstract, which should be brief (600–1000 characters) and not too technical, and an Introduction that includes relevant references and provides the nonspecialist reader with a general idea of the state of the art of the field and allows the importance of the results to be put into perspective. The presentation of Results and Discussion may be combined or kept separate. These sections may be further divided by subheadings. The results should be summarized succinctly in the Conclusions and comment should be made on their significance and, if appropriate, to the next challenges.