Submitted in February, in the field of neuroscience, the first round of reviews took about 2-3 weeks to complete, with 3 reviewers in total. 2 reviewers requested major revisions and 1 requested rejection. The editor requested major revisions and it took 3 months to address the concerns raised by the reviewer who requested rejection. The revised manuscript was resubmitted in May, one of the reviewers who requested major revisions requested another round of revisions, while the reviewer who initially requested rejection provided minor revisions. The other reviewer accepted the manuscript as is. The editor approved the minor revisions. One more round of minor revisions was made in July and the manuscript was finally accepted. The reviewers' comments were very targeted and the editor was very responsive, with a quick turnaround time.

(0) 讚！ | 勇敢做自己

June 19, 2026 Research journal WOS real-time impact factor 3930/668=5.88, conservative prediction for 2026 is between 14-15, with 251 papers published and an expected 600 for the whole year. In 2025: 431; 2024: 237; 2023: 267. It seems that there is no shortage of high-quality sources, with both quantity and quality on the rise! However, the citation rate for Research journal in 2025 reached 27.4%, possibly due to the increase in the number of publications, with CEJ and AFM following closely. Domestic journals like Research currently lack international influence, it is crucial for the impact factor to remain above 10 and to publish over 1000 papers annually.

In comparison, Science Advances real-time impact factor is 29092/5355=5.43, with a conservative prediction for 2026 between 13-14, 1 lower than Research. 1387 papers have been published, with an expected 3300 for the whole year. Despite maintaining publication volume, the main citations in 2025 were from small NC, AFM, and AM.

Comparing with Nature Communications real-time impact factor if=169009/22530=7.50, conservatively predicted to be between 18-19 for 2026, about 4.5 higher than Research. 4061 papers have been published, with an expected 10000 for the whole year. It seems that due to OA policies, there is a trend of fewer sources and a decrease in publication volume, but the influence remains. The main citations in 2025 were from small NC, AFM, and CEJ.

(0) 讚！ | FelixHI

On June 19, 2026, the real-time impact factor of the Research journal in the WOS search was 3930/668=5.88. The conservative prediction for 2026 is between 14-15, with 251 articles already published and an expected total of 600 for the year. In 2025, there were 431 articles published; in 2024, there were 237; and in 2023, there were 267. It seems that there is no shortage of high-quality sources for articles, and both quantity and quality are on the rise! However, in 2025, the Research journal's citation rate reached 27.4%, possibly due to the increase in the number of articles published, with CEJ and AFM following closely behind. Domestic journals like Research still lack sufficient international influence, so it is important to maintain an impact factor of over 10 and publish over 1000 articles per year.

In comparison, the real-time impact factor of Science Advances is 29092/5355=5.43. The prediction for 2026 is between 13-14, which is 1 point lower than Research. There have been 1387 articles published, with an expected total of 3300 for the year. The publication rate remains stable, with the main citations in 2025 coming from small NC, AFM, and AM.

Nature Communications has a real-time impact factor of 169009/22530=7.50. The conservative prediction for 2026 is between 18-19, which is likely to be 1 point lower than Research. There have been 4061 articles published, with an expected total of 10000 for the year. It appears that there is a trend of fewer sources and a decrease in the number of articles published due to OA policies, but the influence remains strong. The main citations in 2025 were from small NC, AFM, and CEJ.

(0) 讚！ | FelixHI

Submit for seven days, assign a reference number, and desk reject in three days.

(0) 讚！ | sybilll

Could you please tell me why we are unable to see the submission status in the system after submitting? Also, do all authors need to confirm their author identities?

(0) 讚！ | bpdlihd

Accept it!

(0) 讚！ | Xuan518

Submit the manuscript to SA for consideration, request a double-blind anonymous version for review, then proceed to the review process. After receiving the review comments, make revisions and resubmit for further review. The manuscript will go through major and minor revisions during the external review process before ultimately being accepted.

After submitting to SA, seeing the reviews on Xiaohongshu made me a bit worried. Based on my own submission experience, the first step of double-blind review (after October 1, 2025) was very friendly to our group submissions. I hope this will continue. The process before review was slow, but once the decision was made to proceed to review, the process was fast.

(0) 讚！ | alive077

This journal has reached a transfer agreement with Science Advances, and many manuscripts from SA have been transferred here. 
The editor will first send the manuscript to three regular reviewers of the journal for internal review, which takes about a week. This process is double-blind, so it is very friendly to small units or small research groups. 
After that, you will be asked to revise the manuscript according to the opinions of the three reviewers (I am not sure about the probability of being asked to revise, but based on the manuscript number, the rejection rate seems quite high). After completing the revisions, you can resubmit the manuscript for review (as long as you make the changes they suggest, it will be guaranteed to be reviewed). 
Then, revise according to the opinions of the reviewers, but I am not sure about the exact acceptance rate for this step. 
In short, the double-blind peer review of this journal ensures that there are no preferential treatments, and they will not send letters to boost the impact factor. Among domestic journals, it should be relatively trustworthy. As long as the quality of the work is good, you can feel confident in submitting your articles, especially those from small research groups.

(1) 讚！ | 我是来围观的

Wow, I thought this 10-carat character was so powerful, but they're leaving comments everywhere excitedly saying "just practice more"? WTF??? Have you lost your mind?

(0) 讚！ | 慕白ss

It seems like everyone has pitched in.

(0) 讚！ | heyboy1987

Hello, I would like to ask if during the first round of editing, the editor requested for the submission of a Conflict of Interest and License to Publish. Is it required for each author to submit a separate copy?

(0) 讚！ | 胖虎君

Everything else is fine, it's just that the review process is relatively slow. It took a month to receive the manuscript number after submission, and having the manuscript number is equivalent to being under review. The first round of review took three months, with many suggestions provided, but the time given for revisions was very tight. The second round was quicker, taking about a month to complete, and the subsequent process was very fast.

(0) 讚！ | wangxiaomin

It should be soon, the review process for this journal is indeed slow, but it is very efficient afterwards.

(0) 讚！ | honghong2

A very good journal, looking forward to consistently maintaining high efficiency. It takes 2-3 months from submission to obtaining a DOI number. Waiting for rejection or review takes 10-20 days, which seemed a bit slow at the time (possibly because this journal is more cautious about the review process). However, once the decision to review is made, every editing step is very efficient. The editor responds within 24 hours, the reviewers are very professional and provide valuable suggestions. Major revisions are quite challenging, indicating that missing parts need to be filled in and laziness is not an option.

(1) 讚！ | honghong2

This journal has a style similar to Nature Science. Submissions that do not meet the requirements will be rejected directly.

(0) 讚！ | 十克拉

Practice more if you want to improve your cooking skills.

(0) 讚！ | 十克拉

It feels very fast. After the initial submission, the editor raised several questions for further experimentation before resubmission. The second submission was sent back for major revisions after three weeks, then minor revisions were requested after a week, and finally accepted after another week.

(0) 讚！ | heyboy1987

Same, exactly the same, all between 21 days to 22 days.

(0) 讚！ | SomnusM

It took only 20 days from under review to receiving the initial review comments. After three minor revisions and two major revisions, the revised manuscript was resubmitted and feedback was received within three weeks. The manuscript was accepted after the minor revisions.

(0) 讚！ | 那就好爆

Practice more dishes.

(0) 讚！ | 十克拉

Don't submit it, unless you don't believe in superstition. It's a waste of time. It's ridiculous that after waiting for over 20 days, I just received the manuscript number and got rejected 20 minutes later. However, the system had already rejected it the day before without any feedback. I asked a few people, and they all experienced the same situation.

(0) 讚！ | 寜1217

Generally, the results will be available the day after for manuscripts with a reference number starting with D, either for review or rejection.

(0) 讚！ | 倾心

It is said to be under editing for internal audit.

(0) 讚！ | SEU科研小白

It has been three weeks since submission. I am the first author and my advisor is the second author. I still cannot see the status of the manuscript, but all authors have confirmed via email.

(0) 讚！ | 我欲乘风归去

After submitting the manuscript, besides the corresponding author, can other authors not see the status of the system? Or do all authors need to confirm before they can see it?

(1) 讚！ | SEU科研小白