I will not consider this journal in the future.

(0) 讚！ | 无边大海

This journal has a terrible attitude. I submitted to Matter twice, Matter said they consulted with the editor of Chem Catalysis and asked me to transfer to Chem Catalysis. However, after transferring, they did not review my paper and asked me to transfer to Cell Reports Physical Science instead, which is frustrating. My paper includes calculations and in situ characterization, and they asked me to submit to this journal. It wasted my time. I shouldn't have transferred to Chem Catalysis, as their publication volume is small and the quality of the articles is not great, falling behind ACB, etc.

(0) 讚！ | 无边大海

How about Blue Label ACS?

(0) 讚！ | 衰钟啊

Chem catal is a journal launched by Chem to benchmark against ACS Catalysis, but generally the benchmark cannot reach this level. So don't imagine it. I have published a paper in this journal, but it is still not indexed in SCI. As for why the big shots submit manuscripts, it is a common trick to invite contributions and increase citations for the new journal. It would be impressive if the impact factor could be maintained at 10 in three to five years (after all, ACS Catalysis is only 12).

(0) 讚！ | 者学海上

Not a journal of the same level, Chem catal is a journal launched by chem to compete with ACS catal, generally not reaching the same level. I once published a paper in this journal, but it is still not indexed in SCI. Once it is indexed in SCI, papers published before the indexing date are unlikely to be included in SCI, so it is not recommended to invest before becoming SCI. It's useless.

(1) 讚！ | 上交学者

There was a paper that was not up to the standard of ACS Catalysis, so it was submitted to Chem Catalysis and accepted after revisions by three reviewers. In general, Chem Catalysis is a sub-journal of Chem, which is a sub-journal of Cell. Another sub-journal of Cell is iScience. The positioning of this journal is to benchmark against ACS Catalysis, but it is still far behind, and its recognition is also lacking. The development of sub-journals under Cell is not very successful, so we hope that this journal can survive.

(1) 讚！ | 上交学者

Why not submit to Angewandte Chemie or apply to ACS Catalysis? I think the recognition of these journals is currently higher than the one you are submitting to.

(0) 讚！ | qq572020211

Apart from Joule, Chem, Matter, and some recognition, there is really no need to submit to other sub-journals at the moment. The difficulty is very high, and the key is that universities do not recognize them now. The recognition of project applications is also not high. It is better to submit to Angew, JACS, AM, AFM, ACS Catal, etc.

(0) 讚！ | qq572020211

It's hard to put into words, but I won't say more. Of course, I am hoping that this journal can take off.

(0) 讚！ | mimi111

Your article was rejected by Nat. Sus. for review, why not try Nature Catalysis/Synthesis/Communications, which are relatively easier to be accepted by Nature. If these Nature sub-journals are not suitable, you can also try professional top journals such as JACS/Angew/AM, whose recognition is much higher than Chem Catalysis. Even if these professional top journals are not suitable, you can try ACS Catalysis, which has better recognition, fewer reviewers (usually 2), and faster review speed. I recently submitted an article to ACS Catalysis, and received reviewer comments in just 15 days, both of which were minor revisions.

(0) 讚！ | 薛定谔猫

Update: After modification, the article was accepted. In my opinion, the quality of the articles in the journal is very good, but the cost-effectiveness is currently not high. Currently, the evaluation index points within the school cannot match top journals such as Chem, Mater, Angew, and AM. However, the submission requirements and difficulty are very high (top journal level), which leads to a mismatch between input and output. It may sound utilitarian, but scientific research requires money, energy, and time, which are all very real factors. Therefore, if the journal editors or publishers do not improve the positioning of the journal or take actions to increase the weight of the journal in research institutions, I suggest not rushing to submit. I hope the Chinese editors of the journal see these comments!!!

(0) 讚！ | mimi111

Why is it taking so long? After the rework is sent back under review, will it be accepted directly? Or is there a second review?

(0) 讚！ | 旭老师

Submitted in early December, received first round of comments in mid-January, made minor and major revisions, received feedback three weeks later, and accepted one month later. The process was not fast, but the quality of the article is indeed good. Now just waiting for it to be indexed in SCIE.

(0) 讚！ | 一叶知秋

It is already 1 district.

(0) 讚！ | 稍远

It seems that this journal is not yet indexed in SCI, so it cannot be used for graduate studies or for applying for various scholarships. If used for graduation, submitting to this journal may not be very suitable.

(0) 讚！ | 薛定谔猫

It has been 60 days since submission, and finally received the reviewer's comments. There were 5 reviewers, feeling ashamed. I feel that the cost-effectiveness is not high, not that it is trash, but it does not reach that level. I believe that my current content and the materials I have supplemented are at the level of NS sub-journals, comparable to Angew and JACS. Currently, in terms of evaluation indicators and impact factors, Chem catalysis clearly does not reach this level. So I think it is not worth it. If the editorial team of the journal does not make efforts to improve the positioning of the journal, I sincerely advise everyone not to submit to it, just let it die out on its own. It is a waste of time, money, and energy, with the rewards not matching the effort. If you have the time, why not submit to AEM, AFM, ACS nano, ACS catal, as the evaluation criteria in schools are the same, saving time and with fewer reviewers.

(1) 讚！ | mimi111

Submitted to Nat. sus. and rejected after review. Then submitted to Joule and rejected, then transferred to Chem catalysis. It's been 56 days since submission to Chem catalysis, and the editor still hasn't replied, it's ridiculously slow, I should have known to try Angew instead. I heard the next door at least received comments from four reviewers. I want to curse. You better disband soon. If you don't give me review comments soon and delay my graduation, I will scold you every time I see you, and ruin your reputation until the end!!!

(0) 讚！ | mimi111

ACS Catalysis is definitely more recognized and will have a greater impact!

(0) 讚！ | 薛定谔猫

May I ask if the status can only be seen within the communication account?

(0) 讚！ | 一根鞋带鸭

This journal is not yet indexed in SCI. It is uncertain whether it will be included in the Chinese Academy of Sciences' ranking and SCI by the end of the year. Its investment value is not significant, as many universities only recognize SCI.

(0) 讚！ | 柳下挥

The first review took six weeks, with three major revisions. The editor gave a rejection with the option to resubmit, along with additional in situ experiments to clarify the issues. After submission, the paper was accepted directly one month later. The overall quality of the journal articles is acceptable, although it is not a domestic journal. Many prestigious academicians submit their work to this journal. In general, the quality of articles in this journal may be slightly lower than ACS Catalysis but similar to AEM and ACS Nano, making it worth investing in.

(0) 讚！ | 稍远

The same situation, 40 days have passed and no response has been received.

(0) 讚！ | 海大曹县人

Which one is more worth investing in, acs catal or chem catal? One is new and the other is well-established, it's a tough decision. Can any experts provide some guidance?

(0) 讚！ | UCLCHEM

It's almost time for the Initial Public Offering (IPO), what is the expected price?

(0) 讚！ | 副研

Just kidding haha. According to my estimation, IF is around 12-13 now. The overall trend of IF has been declining in the past two years. The heat finally decreased a bit

(0) 讚！ | dataiyang