Neuroscience of Consciousness

245 papers and 3.5k indexed citations i.

About

The 245 papers published in Neuroscience of Consciousness in the last decades have received a total of 3.5k indexed citations. Papers published in Neuroscience of Consciousness usually cover Cognitive Neuroscience (210 papers), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (40 papers) and Social Psychology (38 papers) specifically the topics of Neural dynamics and brain function (111 papers), Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies (78 papers) and Visual perception and processing mechanisms (55 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Neuroscience of Consciousness are Stephen M. Fleming, Tim Bayne, Hakwan Lau, Johnjoe McFadden, Philip Gerrans, Chris Letheby, Brian Maniscalco, Giulio Ruffini, Giulio Tononi and Olivia Carter.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Neuroscience of Consciousness

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Neuroscience of Consciousness. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Neuroscience of Consciousness.

Countries where authors publish in Neuroscience of Consciousness

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Neuroscience of Consciousness. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by papers published in Neuroscience of Consciousness with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Neuroscience of Consciousness more than expected).

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar’s output or impact.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025