By the way, I would like to ask all the experts, does using my own email to submit articles for review have a big impact for a novice like me who has just started working?

(0) 讚！ | 无名123

How many days will it take to hang up?

(0) 讚！ | 无名123

5.4 Morning submission
5.4 with editor
5.9 Changed once, still with editor
5.13 Decision in Process, based on experience, it's likely to be rejected.

(0) 讚！ | 无名123

Making a wish here can help facilitate the acceptance of the review.

(0) 讚！ | 无名123

The first review has been with two reviewers for over 15 days, and they still haven't returned it. It's really urgent.

(0) 讚！ | Kistagoogle

Bless myself and hoping for a chance to make amends.

(1) 讚！ | 望好运。

Just want to know the hanging time, it's been 9 days and there's been no movement.

(0) 讚！ | 山海风

Not submitted directly DIP, it is estimated to fail.

(0) 讚！ | Kistagoogle

4.24 morning WE
4.24 evening DIP
4.29 still DIP
How long does DIP usually last?

(0) 讚！ | 山海风

The speed is quite fast, less than two months to accept.

(0) 讚！ | Kistagoogle

Share the submission process with everyone~
2026.02.26 Submitted
2026.03.18 MR
2026.04.07 Submitted
2026.04.22 Accepted
This work took two years for the student to complete, transitioning from AEM. It hasn't been easy, but thanks to the recognition from the journal and editors. The double-blind mechanism is fair, and I wish smooth submissions for other research works as well!

(0) 讚！ | 科研可甜

4.10 With Editor
.......
4.16 With Editor
4.17 With Editor amended once
4.18 With Editor amended again, what's going on? Can someone who knows explain it?
4.21 Under Review finally submitted for review, all the waiting has paid off.

(1) 讚！ | Kistagoogle

4.10 With Editor
.......
4.16 With Editor
4.17 With Editor changed once
4.18 With Editor changed again, what's going on? Any experts know?

(0) 讚！ | Kistagoogle

Did we not agree on a 4-day turnaround for the first decision? It's taking too long. I was "With Editor" on 4.10, and still "With Editor" today on 4.18. What's going on with the editor, are they on a business trip?

(0) 讚！ | Kistagoogle

2026.04.11 With Editor
2026.04.17 With Editor

(0) 讚！ | 火舞旋风剑法

How is it going now? 2 rounds of revisions with the editor? Has it been submitted for review, or has it been accepted?

(0) 讚！ | Kistagoogle

4.10 With Editor
.......
4.16 With Editor Why is it taking so long to be With Editor? How long will it take to be reviewed? It feels too slow. After being rejected by AM, I chose a journal. How is the speed of this journal?

(0) 讚！ | Kistagoogle

Does the OP have anything to say? I also dipped, and now I'm panicking.

(1) 讚！ | 衣服菌

How about it, OP? Were you rejected after the RRC?

(0) 讚！ | 顶刊收割机

On the academic path, what is most difficult is not adding icing on the cake, but providing justice like sending charcoal in the snow. Reading about a peer's experience with submitting to ESM, I resonate deeply. Our work on sulfide solid-state lithium battery anodes has also been quietly polished for 2 years, and was submitted to ESM for review on February 11, 2026. 

In this fast-paced publishing era, I am grateful that "Energy Storage Materials" still adheres to the original intention of 'double-blind peer review'. For ordinary researchers like us without the halo of a large team, this system allows manuscripts to no longer be dependent on the authors' titles, but to return to the value of the work itself. I look forward to ESM’s efficiency and professionalism bringing a fair judgment to our work, and I hope to, like that peer, receive the best news in this rigorous and warm environment. Regardless of the outcome, this 'only talent is raised' academic environment deserves the praise of every serious research scientist.

(3) 讚！ | sfu

Has it been fixed after the dip?

(0) 讚！ | Shanshan Feng

How are you now, have you accepted it?

(0) 讚！ | 顶刊收割机

Excuse me, does the RRC have a dip? Is it a good thing that the first-instance RRC is too fast?

(0) 讚！ | Shanshan Feng

The work on the lithium-ion battery cathode based on poor cobalt and manganese has been done for 3 years. It was first submitted to AM, rejected after 15 days, and the editor suggested submitting to a small journal. It was then submitted to AEM, rejected after 3 days, submitted to Angew. Chem. Int. Ed, rejected within 2 days, tried nano energy, rejected after 2 days for lack of innovation. Finally, it was submitted to ESM, sent for review after 3 days, returned with feedback in about 15 days from two reviewers, both providing positive feedback suggesting minor revisions. The revised manuscript was returned half a month later, accepted after 5 days, immediately went online, and proofs were corrected within 3 days. Sincere thanks to Academician Cheng Huiming and Editor Wu Zhongshuai for their support. Also, special thanks to the double-blind review system adopted by "Energy Storage Materials" - it is this fair mechanism that enables ordinary researchers without prestigious titles to still have their work valued. Thanks to the efficient and professional reviewers at ESM, who brought warmth in the form of the first feedback in the new year when the student felt almost desperate. If you are also experiencing difficulties in submitting manuscripts and facing setbacks in research, I hope my sharing can bring you some comfort. I have also stumbled along the way, and when you start to doubt yourself, may this experience bring you a glimmer of hope. The road of scientific research is long and challenging, but worth persevering, and you are not alone.

(1) 讚！ | 不二周助大哥

How is it going? Is the review process fast?

(0) 讚！ | Shanshan Feng