今晚吃鸡 2022-03-04

2021.12.13 Submission
12.15 Under review
1.15 Major revision (Two reviewers, the second reviewer provided six negative comments, editor requested major revision)
2.13 Resubmission (Cited numerous literature to refute the second reviewer, agreed with my responses, and raised formatting issues)
2.28 Minor revision
3.2 Accepted
Thanks to Alejandro J. Müller, the editor from Spain, for the efficient handling of the manuscript. Hopefully, Polymer's impact factor will continue to rise and regain its rightful international status.

hdjehd 2022-03-01

2.17 submitted
2.17 until now with editor
This is my first time submitting to the journal POLYMER, and I am unsure about the reviewing speed.

dudupipi 2022-03-01

12.31 submitted
1.16 under review
2.6 till now required review completed

hdjehd 2022-03-01

Hello, it has been more than ten days with the editor. I don't know how long it will take for review.

向paper发起冲锋 2022-02-25

2022.1.4 Submission
2022.1.28 Minor revisions for 28 days, not many comments but all very professional. After careful editing, resubmit.
2022.2.13 Resubmission
2022.2.20 Accepted

wql116 2022-02-17

Normally it wouldn't be this slow, I would have submitted it for review in 5 days.

jiaovv 2022-02-14

It has been one month since submission, but it is still "with editor". May I ask if it is possible to send an inquiry letter?

淘淘到天边 2022-01-19

First time submitting to this journal, when submitting, it was about the psychology of being a cannon fodder. If it didn't feel right, I planned to revise and resubmit. The manuscript had gone through multiple rounds of revisions before submission, even the framework had been rewritten several times. I felt like I had no temper left after all the revisions. So I decided to submit it and accumulate some experience. The result was quite smooth, and I am very grateful for the recognition from the editor and the reviewer. The fact proves that there will be rewards for efforts, and one must believe in oneself and continue to work hard!
Nov. 25 submitted
Nov. 26 edited
Nov. 29 reviewed
Dec. 7 required reviews completed
Dec. 16 reviewed
Dec. 21 major revision
Jan. 8 resubmitted after modification
Jan. 10 accepted
The opinions of the two reviewers were very serious, and their suggestions were very reasonable and detailed. I responded very cautiously to the comments of the second reviewer, consulted many references, because I felt that the modification in one place was different from the reviewer's opinion. After consulting many references, I explained the reasons and also clarified my own issues in expression. I thought I would have to go through a second round of revisions, but unexpectedly it was accepted directly. I am very grateful for Editor Han's recognition.
Through this submission experience, I have learned two things. First, don't be afraid of revisions when submitting, multiple revisions will continuously improve the ideas and quality of the article. Second, if there are differences with the reviewer's opinions, multiple verifications can be conducted to explain the differences. Because academic research itself is a process of continuous discussion.

阿尔法贝塔 2021-11-15

Sep 20, 2021 Submission
Nov 4, 2021 Review comments are out
Nov 8, 2021 Return
Nov 12, 2021 Accept
Two reviewers, one has no comments, the other has two minor questions that need to be addressed, no need to modify the content of the manuscript.

njfulxy 2021-10-14

Did you submit it for review? I have been with the editor for a month and haven't received any updates.

科研民工1988 2021-10-09

Continue to follow up and supplement the latest news of my manuscript.

2021.8.5 - Article submission.
2021.8.11 - Article under review.
2021.8.29 - Article returned with revision comments. One major revision and one minor revision. The reviewer requested additional experiments for the minor revision. Overall evaluation was good. The major revision reviewer believed that the significance of the results in the article was not significant enough and raised several professional questions, which were difficult to reply to.
2021.9.17 - Article returned to Polymer Journal, diligently revised according to the reviewer's comments.
2021.10.9 - Article acceptance notification. It took about 3 weeks, coinciding with the end of the October 1st holiday. I hope this journal continues to improve. Actually, this article was rejected by a polymer journal, and it seems that the reputation of large molecules in the polymer field is still good.

chriswang 2021-10-04

"Are articles on constitutive modeling and simulation in mechanics welcome now?"

科研咸鱼 2021-10-03

Two reviewers, a total of 11 questions, most of which are minor issues.
After revision, it was accepted within 2 weeks, so the speed was still very fast.

科研民工1988 2021-09-30

Submitted on August 5th, received reviewer comments in less than a month. One major revision and one minor revision were suggested. After the revisions, we are now waiting for the final decision. The reviewer is quite professional and raised some sharp questions. However, the reputation of this journal has declined in recent years compared to its earlier days.

科研咸鱼 2021-09-30

Submitted in July, feedback was given after one month.

菜小白长成中 2021-07-25

It has been over two months under review and the date hasn't changed at all. Can I request an update?

菜小白长成中 2021-07-25

It has been over two months under review, and the date has not changed at all. Can we remind them to submit the manuscript?

Aaron 2021-06-17

4.25 Submission
5.24 Minor revisions
5.29 Acceptance
6.2 Published

HKMP5 2021-06-15

I have been submitting for a month and still with the editor. So slow... I am unsure whether I should write a letter to inquire.