Note: The following journal information is for reference only. Please check the journal website for updated information prior to submission.
Journal Title
MICRON
MICRON
ISSN / eISSN
0968-4328 / 1878-4291
Aims and Scope
Micron is an interdisciplinary forum for all work that involves new applications of microscopy or where advanced microscopy plays a central role. The journal will publish on the design, methods, application, practice or theory of microscopy and microanalysis, including reports on optical, electron-beam, X-ray microtomography, and scanning-probe systems. It also aims at the regular publication of review papers, short communications, as well as thematic issues on contemporary developments in microscopy and microanalysis. The journal embraces original research in which microscopy has contributed significantly to knowledge in biology, life science, nanoscience and nanotechnology, materials science and engineering.
Subject Area
MICROSCOPY
CiteScore
4.30
View Trend
CiteScore Ranking
| Category | Quartile | Rank |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology - Structural Biology | Q3 | #29/45 |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology - Cell Biology | Q3 | #195/274 |
Web of Science Core Collection
| Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) | Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) |
|---|---|
| Indexed | - |
| Category (Journal Citation Reports 2023) | Quartile |
|---|---|
| MICROSCOPY - SCIE | Q2 |
H-index
75
Country/Area of Publication
ENGLAND
Publisher
Elsevier Ltd
Publication Frequency
Bimonthly
Year Publication Started
1993
Annual Article Volume
96
Open Access
NO
Contact
PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD, THE BOULEVARD, LANGFORD LANE, KIDLINGTON, OXFORD, ENGLAND, OX5 1GB
Verified Reviews
Review process:
First review, one rejection and one revision request, the editor requested major revisions.
Second review, one rejection and one acceptance, the editor rejected it.
The reasons for the two rejections are not clear. The reviewers who were rejected thought it was due to data errors (which were not explicitly mentioned in the first review, so the revisions were not made in a timely manner).
In fact, it was a misunderstanding and not a data error, but rather an overlap in the peak spectrum (I would like to explain). I don't really like the vague rejection style of the reviewers, it seems they just don't like this short article.
In the end, the editor rejected it and there was no chance to explain.
I submitted two articles before and had similar issues (one rejection and one acceptance). The reviewers who rejected it seemed to have a higher level of subjectivity.
It's a very good journal! I will submit again if I have good data.
9.21 with editor
9.22 under review
、、、During the waiting process, send an email to inquire on 1.22
1.23 minor revise
1.25 resubmitted to journal
1.25 accepted
Find Funding. Review Successful Grants.
Explore over 25,000 new funding opportunities and over 6,000,000 successful grants.
ExploreCreate your own webinar
Interested in hosting your own webinar? Check the schedule and propose your idea to the Peeref Content Team.
Create Now