The Neuroscientist
peer-reviewed academic journal that publishes papers in the field of Neurology
The Neuroscientist is a peer-reviewed academic journal that publishes papers in the field of Neurology and Neuroscience. The journal's editor is Stephen G Waxman (Yale University). It has been in publication since 1995 and is currently published by SAGE Publications.
Scope
The Neuroscientist is aimed at basic neuroscientists, neurologists, neurosurgeons, and psychiatrists in research, academic, and clinical settings, reviewing new and emerging basic and clinical neuroscience research. The journal evaluates key trends in molecular, cellular, developmental, behavioral systems, and cognitive neuroscience in a disease-relevant format.
Abstracting and indexing
The Neuroscientist is abstracted and indexed in, among other databases: SCOPUS, and the Social Sciences Citation Index. According to the Journal Citation Reports, its 2013/2014 impact factor is 6.837, ranking it 11 out of 194 journals in the category ‘Clinical Neurology’. and 25 out of 185 journals in the category ‘Clinical Neurology’.
“The Neuroscientist” enters the record as peer-reviewed academic journal that publishes papers in the field of Neurology. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Neuroscientist, peer-reviewed and academic can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“The Neuroscientist” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Neuroscientist, peer-reviewed and academic provides the most credible route into that argument.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 23, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q7753449. 3 of 3 selected statements include explicit references; 1 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1995, 2013 and 2014.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “The Neuroscientist”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow The Neuroscientist primary sources, The Neuroscientist archive and Neuroscientist research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “The Neuroscientist”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “The Neuroscientist” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.