“…In the last decades, the addition of conducting coating materials and secondary phases such as mixed ionic–electronic conducting organic materials (e.g., conducting polymers), working as linkers between inorganic nanomaterials, has attracted a lot of attention (Judeinstein and Sanchez, 1996 ; Gómez-Romero and Lira-Cantú, 1997 ; Guizard et al, 2001 ; Le Bideau et al, 2011 ). It is well-accepted that electronic conducting organic polymers, usually called conjugated polymers, are semiconductors in nature and that the most popular cases such as poly(pyrrole) (Ppy) (Della Santa et al, 1997 ), poly(aniline) (PANI) (Zhang K. et al, 2012 a; Chatterjee et al, 2013 ; Zhang Q. et al, 2013 a; Roussel et al, 2015 ), poly(ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT) (Crispin et al, 2006 ; Udo et al, 2009 ; Takano et al, 2012 ; Kim et al, 2013 ; Mengistie et al, 2013 , 2015 ; Lee et al, 2014 ; Kumar et al, 2016 ; Zia Ullah et al, 2016 ), and poly(3-hexylthiophene) (P3HT) (Zhang Q. et al, 2012 ; Pingel and Neher, 2013 ; Glaudell et al, 2015 ; Jacobs et al, 2016 ; Qu et al, 2016 ; Jung et al, 2017 ; Wang W. et al, 2017 ; Lim et al, 2018 ) generally exhibit an electronic donor behavior. In this case, the most common procedure to enhance the electronic conduction, where charge carriers will be mostly holes rather than electrons, is by doping these polymers with electronic acceptor species (p-type doping) such as halide and sulfonate salts, yielding a decrease in the electronic band gap and an increase of the electronic conductivity up to σ e ~ 10 −1 -10 3 S cm −1 values (Della Santa et al, 1997 ; Crispin et al, 2006 ; Udo et al, 2009 ; Takano et al, 2012 ; Zhang K. et al, 2012 ; Zhang Q. et al, 2012 , 2013 ; Chatterjee et al, 2013 ; Kim et al, 2013 ; Mengistie et al, 2013 , 2015 ; Pingel and Neher, 2013 ; Lee et al, 2014 ; Glaudell et al, 2015 ; Roussel et al, 2015 ; Jacobs et al, 2016 ; Kumar et al, 2016 ; Qu et al, 2016...…”