About the journal
Journal of Nervous System and Physiological Phenomena
A nervous system is studied at many scales at once, and the journal is built for that: it publishes peer-reviewed research on the structure, function and organization of the nervous system, and on the physiological phenomena that arise from it.
- Publisher
- Open Access Pub
- Access
- Open access — published articles are free to read
- Peer review
- Single-blind by default; double-blind review is available on request.
- Editorial correspondence
- [email protected]
What the journal is for
One question — how a signal is produced, how it is regulated, and what follows when that regulation changes — is asked of ion channels and of whole organisms alike. The journal treats those as one subject rather than several.
Nervous-system research is carried out in laboratories, in mathematical models and at the bedside, and the same phenomenon is often held by all three at once. Respiratory control is measured in chemoreceptor recordings, described in models of a feedback loop, and met again in the physiology of critical illness. A journal drawn widely enough to publish across that range lets a reader follow the phenomenon rather than the method.
The journal publishes experimental studies, theoretical and computational analysis, methodological contributions and critical reviews of existing evidence. Each is assessed on what it establishes and how clearly it establishes it. The current article types and the scope boundary are set out in Aims and Scope.
Supporting that work is the second half of the job. Manuscripts are read against the journal's stated scope and requirements before review, accepted articles are made openly available on publication, and the published record is kept complete and accurately described.
Where this page sits
About sets out purpose, readership and editorial responsibility. The definitive subject boundary belongs to Aims and Scope, and the people accountable for it are listed on the Editorial Board.
Terms an author needs
Manuscript requirements are set out in the Instructions for Authors, and publishing terms in Article Processing Charges and Editorial Policies.
Who the journal serves
Three groups meet in the same pages, and the journal is answerable to each of them in a different way.
Researchers who submit
Investigators working on nervous-system function who want their work read by people who understand its methods, and who want the finished article available without charge to anyone who needs it. What the journal owes them is a clear scope, a stated review model, and a decision it can explain.
Readers who use the record
Physiologists, neuroscientists, clinicians, editors and students who arrive with a specific question and need to see what was measured, under what conditions, and what the authors concluded from it. What the journal owes them is an accurate record and articles that state their own limits.
Editors and reviewers who assess the work
Subject-matter specialists who take responsibility for what appears under the journal's name and who assess a manuscript on its evidence. What the journal owes them is independence: their judgment decides what is published.
Why the remit matters
Questions about the nervous system reach across methods and organ systems, and a journal drawn across experimental, theoretical and clinical inquiry keeps that work in one place.
The published record
Published articles illustrate the journal's concerns and show what has appeared so far; the subject boundary the journal applies is set out in Aims and Scope.
Review article · 2024
The Role of Cerebral Hypercarbia in the Induction of the Near-Death Experience
In this review Nigel A Shaw sets out a carbon-dioxide account of the near-death experience, proposing that a hypercarbic brain is a precursor of the state, and weighs it against the other naturalistic explanations in circulation. The argument draws on blood-gas measurements, the narrow range of conditions under which the experience is reported, and work on serotonergic neurons in central respiratory control.
It is a hypothesis argued in a review — a reading of published evidence rather than an experimental report or a clinical procedure — and the author states that the step from a physical event to a mental one remains unaccounted for. The article is a useful illustration of the journal's range: a physiological mechanism proposed for a phenomenon reported at the edge of consciousness research.
- Type
- Review Article
- Published
- 16 December 2024
- Author
- Nigel A Shaw, University of Auckland, New Zealand
Editorial responsibility
How manuscripts are handled, who is accountable for the decision, and the routes by which work reaches the journal.
Review
Single-blind by default; double-blind review is available on request.
All submissions undergo initial editorial screening. Manuscripts that meet the journal's scope and minimum requirements proceed to independent peer review.
Manuscripts that proceed to external peer review are normally evaluated by at least two independent subject-matter experts.
Decisions
Editorial decisions are based on scope, scientific quality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, reporting quality, and relevance to the journal.
Editorial decisions remain independent of fees, services, memberships, or roles.
Editors recuse themselves from decisions on their own submissions; those manuscripts are handled independently.
Editor-in-Chief
Tokyo Metropolitan University, Department of Frontier Health Sciences, Tokyo · Japan
The full board is listed on the Editorial Board page.
Submitting to the journal
- Primary routeManuscriptZone
- Alternative routeSimple manuscript submission form
- Assisted routeEditorial email
Authors must use only one submission route for the same manuscript.
Journal of Nervous System and Physiological Phenomena
Published by Open Access Pub
Questions about whether a manuscript fits the journal may be sent to [email protected] before submission. Author requirements are set out in the Instructions for Authors, and the subject boundary in Aims and Scope.