The Editors of Cortex Discuss the Journal's Citation Success
Journal Interview, October 2010
In a recent analysis of Essential Science IndicatorsSM data from Clarivate the journal Cortex was named a Rising Star in the field of Neuroscience & Behavior. Its current record in this field includes 729 papers cited a total of 8,191 times between January 1, 2000 and June 30, 2010.
Published by Elsevier, Cortex is edited jointly by Professor Sergio Della Sala of the University of Edinburgh and Dr. Jordan Grafman of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health.
Did you expect Cortex to become highly cited, or is this surprising to you?
Our goal was to increase our readership, become more competitive with other cognitive neuroscience journals, and to increase our citation ratings—all in the context of running the journal a little bit like a family business rather than a conglomerate. This said, the quality of a journal should not be judged solely on metrics.
How would you account for the high citation rate of Cortex?
Obviously an improvement in the quality of the manuscripts submitted and subsequently accepted in Cortex. That is partially due to the prestige of the current editorial board and an improved perception that manuscripts will receive a timely and fair review.
Would you give us a brief history of the journal?
"We want our journal to be a home for publications of high quality and lasting impact as well as open and honest debate over ideas in neuropsychology."
The journal was founded in 1964 by Ennio De Renzi, the Chair of Neurology at the University of Modena. He felt the time was right for a neuropsychological journal that specialized in publishing studies of brain-injured patients to shed light on normal cognitive and social processes, to better characterize the functions of patients with specific diseases, and to be influential in the direction that neuropsychology might take in the coming decades.
The journal flourished under the direction of Professor De Renzi for many decades but eventually he felt the time had come for retirement and the journal stewardship passed on to Professor Della Sala, who then invited Dr. Grafman to form an editorial partnership.
What historical factors have contributed to the success of Cortex?
The importance of studying patients with focal or degenerative brain lesions to learn about the functions of the human brain has always been an important feature of neuroscience and clinical neurology, and the journal easily accommodated those interests. There is also the longevity of the journal, and the fact that some of the early editorial board members were among the most prominent researchers in the field. More recently, the increasing (and somewhat undeserved) influence of functional neuroimaging on cognitive neuroscience theory and research, has in fact led to a resurgence of studies on brain-damaged patients, and our journal has benefited from that.
Moreover, more recently, we have spiced up our journal with different sections over and above the Research papers and the Reviews, in particular we have added Special Sections, Discussion Forums, Historical papers, Viewpoints, Commentaries, short Letters, Notes, and personalized Covers, with accompanying editorials which embellish and enrich each issue. We would like Cortex to be seen as the natural home of neuropsychologists from different backgrounds.
Have there been specific developments in the fields served by Cortex that may have contributed?
Two main types of development have contributed to a re-emergence of Cortex. One involves improved methods and design in cognitive and social neuroscience that make it easier to tease apart the subcomponents of a behavioral process leading to greater theoretical advancement.
The second involves more sophisticated techniques to partner with the methodological/design improvement noted above, including high-resolution structural brain scans of various types (e.g., standard MRI or DTI) and functional brain imaging, genetic and epigenetic analyses, and noninvasive brain stimulation techniques (e.g., TMS or DC polarization) along with deep brain stimulation techniques.
"The importance of studying patients with focal or degenerative brain lesions to learn about the functions of the human brain has always been an important feature of neuroscience and clinical neurology, and the journal easily accommodated those interests."
These two developments have led to a broadening of neuropsychology as a field, more sophisticated analyses and convergent results, and the emergence of computational models of behavior and neural networks due to this increasing sophistication of knowledge in neuropsychology.
What, in your view, is this journal's main significance or contribution in the field of Neuroscience & Behavior?
Its emphasis on patient studies.
How do you see your field(s) evolving in the next few years?
Like most fields, neuropsychology will evolve to accommodate different types of techniques and devices. The importance of the techniques will be determined by their ability to uniquely account for variation in behavior, improving our ability to predict behavior in our experimental designs and the real world. New approaches in animals, like optogenetic control of neural functions, may eventually be applicable in humans, opening up a whole new world of precision in predicting the role of specific neural networks in behavior.
Nanotechnology and sophisticated computational devices that can be worn or even implanted will affect the nature of information processing to a degree only imagined in science fiction writing. That will also affect the kinds of studies we do, and the results may be important in describing the new capacities and limitations of human beings.
We hope Cortex will remain in the vanguard of publishing studies using these new evolving technologies that contribute to our understanding of the brain and behavior and also as a journal that provides debate and reconsideration of past certainties in human brain functions.
What role do you see for your journal?
If we are to maintain our role as an important neuropsychological journal, we must survive the current proliferation of journals in the broad fields of cognitive neuroscience and neuropsychology as well as the interest of more general journals in our field (much of latter's interest driven by the visual allure of functional neuroimaging, we fear).
We want our journal to be a home for publications of high quality and lasting impact as well as open and honest debate over ideas in neuropsychology. In addition, we want to streamline the process of publication so that reviews are quick (encouraged by rewards for competent and rapid reviewing) and publication is timely.
In essence, we want our journal to be a site that professional researchers, clinicians, and other interested people can come to with the confidence that the journal will bring them the best that neuropsychology and cognitive neuroscience has to offer in a context of a "family" atmosphere in the best sense of family.
Cortex
Sergio Della Sala and Jordan Grafman, Editors
Elsevier, publisher
CORTEX'S MOST CURRENT MOST-CITED PAPER IN ESSENTIAL SCIENCE INDICATORS:
Catani M, Mesulam M, "The arcuate fasciculus and the disconnection theme in language and aphasia: History and current state," Cortex 44(8): 953-61, September 2008 with 48 cites. Source: Essential Science Indicators from Clarivate.
KEYWORDS: CORTEX, NEUROSCIENCE, NEUROPSYCHOLOGY, BRAIN INJURY, COGNITION, SOCIAL PROCESSES, FOCAL BRAIN LESIONS, DEGENERATIVE BRAIN LESIONS, CLINICAL NEUROLOGY, FUNCTIONAL NEUROIMAGING, BEHAVIORAL PROCESS, THEORETICAL ADVANCEMENT, METHODOLOGIES, PATIENT STUDIES, TECHNIQUES, JOURNAL SECTIONS, FAMILY BUSINESS.