Editorial Policy
Future Molecular Science applies an article processing charge (APC) to enable immediate worldwide open access to all published articles. Details of the current APC rates and waiver policies can be found in this section.
Editorial Policy
Future Molecular Science is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scientific rigor, integrity, and excellence through a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer-review process. The journal adopts a highly selective editorial approach to ensure that published articles represent transformative breakthroughs at the intersection of chemistry, physics, biology, and advanced materials science, demonstrate exceptional scientific quality, and provide meaningful contributions to the broader research community.
All submitted manuscripts undergo a comprehensive multi-stage evaluation process involving editorial assessment and independent expert peer review. The journal follows a single-blind peer-review model, in which reviewers are aware of the identities of authors, while reviewer identities remain confidential.
Initial Editorial Assessment
Upon submission, each manuscript is first evaluated by the Executive Editor through an initial editorial triage process. This assessment focuses on the manuscript's overall suitability for the journal, including its scientific significance, originality, conceptual advance, relevance to the journal's scope, ethical compliance, and alignment with the journal's standards for high-impact publication.
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's threshold for novelty, rigor, significance, or scope may be declined at this stage without external peer review. This early assessment enables an efficient review process while ensuring that reviewers' efforts are focused on manuscripts with genuine potential for publication.
Editorial Quality Assessment
Manuscripts passing the initial triage are forwarded to the Chief Editors for a detailed scientific quality assessment. The Chief Editors evaluate whether the work demonstrates sufficient conceptual innovation, methodological robustness, technical excellence, and potential impact to warrant further consideration.
The Chief Editors are responsible for maintaining the journal's scientific standards and ensuring consistency in editorial decisions. Manuscripts considered suitable for external evaluation are assigned to appropriate Chief Editors and Associate Editors based on subject expertise and disciplinary relevance.
Peer Review Management
Chief Editors and Associate Editors are responsible for managing the peer-review process, including the selection of qualified and independent reviewers, evaluation of reviewer reports, and communication with authors throughout the review process.
Reviewers are selected based on their recognised expertise, scientific contributions, and familiarity with the relevant research area. The journal seeks reviewers who can provide rigorous, constructive, and unbiased assessments of the manuscript's scientific quality, significance, methodology, and presentation.
Typically, manuscripts are evaluated by multiple independent experts. Reviewers are expected to assess, where applicable:
the originality and significance of the scientific contribution;
the advancement beyond existing knowledge;
the validity and completeness of experimental and/or theoretical approaches;
the reliability, reproducibility, and interpretation of data;
the clarity and effectiveness of scientific communication;
the broader implications for technology, and related disciplines.
The journal may request additional reviews or expert opinions when necessary to resolve conflicting assessments or to ensure a robust evaluation process.
Editorial Decision-Making
Final publication decisions are made by the assigned Chief Editors and Associate Editors, taking into account the complete peer-review record, reviewer recommendations, scientific merit, and the journal's overall standards. The Chief Editors and the Executive Editor oversee the entire process, ensuring consistency, fairness, and adherence to the journal's ethical and editorial policies.
Editorial decisions are based on independent scientific judgment rather than reviewer recommendations alone. The Editors may reject manuscripts when concerns remain regarding novelty, significance, methodological rigor, interpretation, or broader impact, even when individual reviewers provide positive recommendations.
The journal maintains a selective acceptance policy and prioritizes manuscripts that represent substantial advances, introduce transformative concepts, reveal fundamental insights, or demonstrate exceptional technological potential.
Appeals and Reconsideration
Authors who believe that an editorial decision was made based on significant misunderstandings or procedural errors may submit a formal appeal. Appeals must provide clear scientific justification and address specific concerns raised during the evaluation process.
All appeals are reviewed jointly by the Chief Editors and the Executive Editor. Decisions on appeals are made after careful consideration of the manuscript, review history, and the authors' response. The outcome of an appeal represents the final editorial decision.
Post-Publication Integrity and Corrections
Future Molecular Science is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scientific record after publication. The journal follows established principles of publication ethics and takes appropriate action when concerns arise regarding published articles.
Potential issues, including data integrity concerns, research misconduct, authorship disputes, conflicts of interest, or significant errors, will be investigated according to recognized international standards.
Major editorial actions, including expressions of concern, corrections, and article retractions, are overseen by the Chief Editors in consultation with the Executive Editor and relevant experts where appropriate. Retraction decisions are reserved for cases where the reliability, validity, or integrity of published findings is fundamentally compromised.