DOKLADY PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY

投稿咨询

官方网站：http://link.springer.com/journal/10634

投稿网址：https://www.springer.com/chemistry/physical+chemistry/journal/10634

PMC链接：http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nlmcatalog?term=0012-5016%5BISSN%5D

物理化学论文是一本由俄语版文章英文译本组成的期刊，该文以俄语发表在科学院报告的物理化学部分。该杂志的目标是发表今天在俄罗斯或与俄罗斯作家合作进行的最重要的物理化学新研究。该杂志只接受俄罗斯代理科学院俄罗斯或外国成员提交或推荐的俄语文章。该期刊不接受英文直接提交。同行评议物理化学论文是一本同行评议的杂志。我们使用开放/单盲/双盲同行评审格式。我们的评审团队包括160多名内部和外部评审员（70%）。2017年从提交到第一次决定的平均时间为3天，从第一次决定到接受的平均时间为30天。2017年提交稿件不合格率为5%。接受发表文章的最后决定由编辑委员会作出。受邀审稿人如因利益冲突，认为不合格或不能审稿，应及时通知编辑，拒绝邀请。审稿人应以合理、合理的方式清楚地陈述自己的观点，以便作者可以利用审稿人的论点来改进手稿。必须避免对作者的个人批评。审稿人应在审稿中指出：（1）作者未引用的任何相关出版作品；（2）以前出版物中报道的任何内容，但未给出适当的参考或引用；（3）任何已报道在以前的出版物和没有适当的参考或引用,(2)任何实质性相似或重叠与其他手稿(发表或未发表)的个人知识。

Doklady Physical Chemistry is a journal consisting of English translations of articles published in Russian on physical chemistry in the physical chemistry sections of Doklady Akademii Nauk. The journal's goal is to publish the most significant new research in physical chemistry carried out in Russia today or in collaboration with Russian authors. The journal accepts only articles in the Russian language that are submitted or recommended by acting Russian or foreign members of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The journal does not accept direct submissions in English.PEER REVIEWDoklady Physical Chemistry is a peer reviewed journal. We use open/single blind/double blind peer review formats. Our team of reviewers includes over 160 reviewers, both internal and external (70%). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 3 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 30 days. The rejection rate for submitted manuscripts in 2017 was 5%. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board.Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified or unable to review the manuscript due to the conflict of interests should promptly notify the editors and decline the invitation. Reviewers should formulate their statements clearly in a sound and reasoned way so that authors can use reviewer’s arguments to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors must be avoided. Reviewers should indicate in a review (i) any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors, (ii) anything that has been reported in previous publications and not given appropriate reference or citation, (iii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.