Editorial Policies
| Publication Standard Format and Content Language standard Supplementary Material |
Refereeing Submission of Manuscripts Retraction and Correction Policies Transfers |
Publication Standard
The Journal of Chemical Physics (JCP) is an international journal that publishes cutting edge research in all areas of modern chemical physics and physical chemistry. The areas covered are highlighted in the summaries of the topical sections of JCP which can be found on the Focus and Coverage page. In addition to Articles, the journal also publishes brief Communications of significant new findings, Perspectives on the latest advances in the field, and Special Topic issues.
To be acceptable for publication in JCP, a manuscript must:
- Report a novel theoretical method or advanced experimental technique for research in chemical physics or contain research that makes a significant advance in improving scientific understanding in a modern area of chemical physics of broad interest.
- Draw appropriate conclusions from rigorous data, methods, and analysis.
- Be concisely and well written, with an appropriate description of the current understanding of the topic and appropriate references to the existing literature.
Format and Content
Manuscripts may be submitted in several formats: Articles, Communications, and Letters to the Editor. Letters to the Editor include Notes, Comments, Responses, and Errata. In addition to the above formats, which appear in most issues, JCP occasionally publishes Special Topic sections and Invited Perspectives, Tutorials, and Reviews.
Submitted manuscripts should have some broad interest to workers in more than one subfield of chemical physics. If your manuscript is about a more specialized topic that might interest only a limited number of readers in one subfield, we encourage you to submit it to a more specialized journal.
Articles are intended to be novel, clear, concise, and definitive reports of research in areas appropriate to the journal. Articles should not contain previously published material and should have a significant quantity of new material. Authors should avoid spreading related results over several manuscripts when the scientific argument would be made more persuasive by grouping many results in a single article. Manuscripts should demonstrate the utility of new methods or techniques, which is often done by including a significant example using the new method. Routine experiments or calculations that simply extend previous methods to a new system are not appropriate unless the results are used to significantly advance the solution of an important problem.
Authors should place their work in context by reference to relevant published literature. Although there is no length limit for Articles, manuscripts should be as concise as possible and present a clear description of the research. It may be more appropriate to present a piece of work as a single, longer article rather than breaking the work down into several shorter articles. In all cases, the editors decide whether the length of an article is appropriate for the information that it contains. Series papers must be self-contained and will be refereed independently. As with any other submission, if the submitted paper cites unpublished work, a preprint of that work needs to be uploaded upon submission as “Additional Material for Reviewer” for the referee process.
Notes are similar to Articles in that they are complete research reports; however, Notes are limited to two journal pages.
Communications are brief reports of highly significant work whose rapid publication will be important to a relatively large number of workers in chemical physics. Communications are given priority attention in both the peer-review and production processes. Communications have a length limit of 3500 words. Figures, equations, tables, and references can be included as appropriate, but are not part of the word count.
Comments are Letters that discuss and supplement original research papers previously published in the journal. Although Comments are often criticism by authors other than those of the original paper, they can be comments on an author's own work. Comments should address nontrivial points of interest to readers other than the authors of the Comment and of the paper being commented on. The editor will usually ask the advice of independent and anonymous referees. Comments will normally also be submitted for review to the authors of the original paper. Authors of the original publication are given the opportunity to submit a Response to the Comment for simultaneous publication. Please see the section on Refereeing below for more details. The editors will iterate between authors of the Comment and authors of the Response as long as the process leads to improvement in the manuscripts. Both Comment and Response must independently satisfy the criteria for acceptance. That is, although the author of the original paper is given the opportunity to submit a Response, there is no requirement that the Response be published even if the Comment is published. The Comment and the Response are each limited to two journal pages. In deciding on the acceptability of Comments and Responses, the editors will attempt to publish only material that significantly improves the reader's understanding of the topic under discussion and to be fair to both sets of authors. These criteria often require significantly more time for the review process than is the case with Articles.
Errata are corrections of errors in previously published papers. These may be either errors introduced in the publication process by either the author or the publisher, or errors in the research that were only discovered after the paper was published. Errata should be confined to specific errors. Further discussion or additional work that either confirms or denies previous work should be presented as a separate Article, Note, or Comment.
Perspective Articles are by invitation from the Editors’ Team. They are overviews on topics currently generating a great deal of interest in the chemical physics community. Perspectives aim to provide an objective and balanced overview of recent advances in the field and the author’s unique perspective on where the field is headed. Perspectives are a community resource and freely available without subscription. Authors may submit a proposal for a Perspective to be considered for invitation by the Editors’ Team using this form.
Tutorial Articles are by invitation from the Editors' Team and aim to further The Journal of Chemical Physics’ mission of serving the broad physical chemistry and chemical physics community. Tutorials are intended as educational tools at the advanced graduate level to help shape the new generation of researchers in chemical physics as well as to support researchers interested in specific topics/techniques and/or improving their skills in particular areas. Tutorials should explain – from an educational perspective – principles and/or techniques in a particular research area. They are also expected to communicate a broad overview of the objectives, results, and open questions in that area of study. Authors may submit a proposal for a Tutorial to be considered for invitation by the Editors’ Team using this form.
Review Articles are by invitation from the Editors' Team. Reviews can be either an authoritative and comprehensive review of an established area, or a short, timely review covering an emerging area or recent advance in an established field of chemical physics. Authors may submit a proposal for a Review to be considered for invitation by the Editors’ team using this form.
Special Topic Sections are reports of new research results that significantly advance our understanding of the field. They are reviewed using the usual criteria for Articles in the journal. Special Topic sections may be assembled by the regular editors or by a guest editor. In all cases, the regular editors will decide whether to accept a manuscript for a Special Topic section. Special Topics are published as ready and on no fixed schedule. Please see the schedule of currently open Special Topics for more information.
Language standard
It is the authors’ responsibility to ensure that manuscripts are written clearly. A manuscript can be rejected if the scientific meaning is unclear due to poor English. Manuscripts that do not meet Journal of Chemical Physics’ language standard will be returned to the authors for rewrite before peer review, during the review process and/or if provisionally accepted pending language editing.Because good science has no value unless it is clearly communicated, AIP Publishing recommends that authors use AIPP Author Services to improve the quality of your paper’s written English. AIPP Author Services was developed in line with our commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion for all authors. Using this service ensures that your paper will be free of language deficiencies, so editors and reviewers will be able to fully understand your research during the review process. A native English-speaking subject matter expert of AIP Author Services will correct spelling, grammar and punctuation and verify the use and consistency of technical terms and content in your paper. Note that this is not a requirement or a guarantee of acceptance for review or publication.
Supplementary Material
The editors and AIP Publishing encourage authors to submit supplementary material for publication alongside their manuscript when appropriate. These materials comprise long data tables, large numbers of figures, and long and detailed portions of text not necessary for an overall understanding of the scientific argument of the paper and that may be of interest to only a few readers who are working on the problem. Supplementary material is linked in the electronic version of the journal and is immediately available to readers. Long data sets are more useful to readers when published this way because they can manipulate the data electronically. There is no restriction on the format of supplemental files; however, the editors strongly encourage authors to use ASCII text for the presentation of data. Word processing packages change in time, and ASCII text files are more likely to be readable in the future. Formats such as PDF and PostScript that cannot be edited are less useful to readers who want to manipulate the data.
Regarding reports of new potential energy surfaces:
Effective 4 August 2016, the journal requires that all manuscripts on new potential energy surfaces be accompanied by a tape archive file (e.g., PES.tar) containing a computer program that can be used to generate the potential, and preferably also its forces, for use in classical trajectory calculations. The only exception will be potentials that are simple enough to be reconstructed solely from the information given in the manuscript.
This computer program can be written in any modern computer language; however, authors must specify the compiler (and its version number), and the program must be accompanied by example input and output files that reproduce some of the key results presented in the manuscript. The PES.tar file will be made available to the referees to review. If the manuscript is accepted for publication, the PES.tar file will be published as supplementary material.Refereeing
The editors make all decisions regarding the acceptability of manuscripts and usually on the advice of expert referees. The editors decide which advice, either positive or negative, to accept and also decide when they have received enough advice to make a decision. In most cases, a manuscript is initially sent to two referees. Authors should follow the advice of the referees and the editor if they feel that this advice will improve the manuscript. If authors do not agree with the advice, they should write to the editor a detailed argument describing their reasons for disagreeing. In such cases, the editor will decide whether the advice of an additional referee is necessary. This additional referee will usually receive anonymous copies of the previous referees’ reviews, along with the authors’ rebuttal. Only the editor conducts the review procedure and makes the final decision.
If a manuscript (including Comments and Responses) contains criticism of, or is in conflict with, previously published work, the authors should bring this to the editor’s attention. Typically, in these cases, the manuscript is first sent to the author of the criticized paper, who will be asked to review the new manuscript as an interested party. Additionally, the identity of the interested party may be made known to the authors of the manuscript under consideration and to any subsequent referees of the paper.
Once a decision has been made on a manuscript, the editors do not ordinarily act as messengers for discussion between the author and the referees. However, occasionally the editors will transmit information from the author to a referee after a decision has been made but only when the author is seeking scientific information from the referee that the referee is likely to have available. Unless the editors require further advice from the referee, they will not transmit arguments for the author that are intended to convince the referee of the validity of the author's position.
The editors welcome suggestions from authors of appropriate referees and will consider an author’s request that a manuscript not be sent to a particular referee. In both cases, these are suggestions, not requirements. The editors will return to the author a manuscript that has required restrictions on the review process.
An author may appeal an Editor's decision to reject a manuscript by making a request in the submission system via the request appeal link. Appeals will only be considered where a clear case for reconsidering the manuscript has been made. Editors are encouraged to consult with their Associate and Deputy Editor colleagues when handling appeals. If the appeal is declined, an author may escalate the appeal to the Editor-in-Chief by sending an email to the editorial office. This will be the final time the scientific merit of the manuscript will be considered.
In the event an author feels the peer-review process of their manuscript was not handled properly, they may appeal to the editorial office that the case be reviewed by the Publisher of AIP Publishing. The Publisher will not make direct decisions on whether a paper should be accepted for publication, but rather will assess whether procedures were followed properly. Additional rounds of review or adjudication would only be called for if proper procedures were not followed.Submission of Manuscripts
Submit manuscripts via Peer X-Press. After you log in to Peer X-Press, you will see a link to author instructions. You can use Peer X-Press to check the status of your submitted manuscript.
Manuscripts must be submitted by a single corresponding author. In all transactions regarding a manuscript, initial submission and all revisions, the corresponding author must act with the knowledge and permission of all coauthors. By submitting a manuscript, all authors imply that the manuscript is an original work by all of the authors, that no authors have been omitted, that none of the material in the manuscript has been previously published, and that the manuscript or any significant piece of it is not currently under consideration elsewhere. The corresponding author of a manuscript can be changed at any point in the review and publication process by informing the JCP Editorial Office; however, the previous corresponding author must request the change, if this is possible. Any single author may request that the review or publication process be stopped.
Because authors must complete the License to Publish Agreement before the journal publishes their manuscript, we encourage you to sign the agreement electronically when you submit your manuscript. This will prevent unnecessary delays.
For specific editorial format requirements and submission information, visit https://aip.pubs.org/aip/jcp/pages/manuscript.
Once a manuscript has been accepted, it is forwarded to the publishers, AIP Publishing, at their production offices in Melville, NY. If you have questions during the production process, contact the AIP Publishing office. The editors accept questions and comments regarding any aspect of the journal, even those out of their immediate control, and will direct such questions or comments to the appropriate person at AIP Publishing, if necessary.Retraction and Correction Policies
AIP Publishing’s policy is based on best practices in academic publishing. We take seriously our responsibility to maintain the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record of our content. We place great importance on the authority of articles after we publish them. Authors may make changes to articles after they have been published online only under the circumstances outlined in AIP Publishing’s Retraction and Correction Policies.Transfers
If it is decided that your manuscript is not suitable for publication in The Journal of Chemical Physics, you may transfer your manuscript, without resubmitting, to AIP Advances for immediate consideration. AIP Advances is a peer-reviewed, fully open-access journal covering all areas of the physical sciences. Articles published in the journal are always freely accessible to download without a subscription.
If you choose to transfer your manuscript to AIP Advances, all reviewer reports and editor recommendations will be transferred along with the manuscript to facilitate a rapid decision. Once transferred, your article may be published online within 14 days, depending on the initial reviewer feedback and editor’s decision. This option may save you up to eight months by avoiding having to resubmit and be reviewed again. For more information about AIP Advances, visit http://aip.pubs.org/aip/adv.
If you wish to transfer your manuscript to another AIP Publishing journal, please review their respective descriptions here and email the editorial office with a request to transfer.
Please note that transferring manuscript files does not guarantee that the receiving journal will publish your manuscript. Manuscripts must meet that respective journal’s acceptance criteria.