JNeurosci publishing experience (Responses)
 Share
The version of the browser you are using is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser.Dismiss

 
View only
 
 
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQ
1
TimestampHave you authored a paper in JNeurosci?How many papers have you authored in JNeurosci?How many of these papers relied on behavioral measures without explicit neural correlates?Please provide reference information regarding your papers in JNeurosci that were behavioral and without explicit neural correlates. (We intend to use this information to estimate citation impact of your papers.)Please provide reference information about your papers published in JNeurosci that included explicit neural correlates of behavior. Have you submitted a paper to JNeurosci and had it rejected without peer review?How many papers have you submitted that were rejected without review?How many of these papers were rejected because the editor found that the paper lacked insights into neural mechanisms?For the papers noted in the above question, please share a portion of the comments that were sent to you from the editor regarding reasons for rejection without review. For each comment please indicate the year that it was received.Please share any thoughts you may have. Thank you for taking time to complete this survey.
2
10/13/2017 20:20:16NoYes22It is well-known that it is useless to submit behavioral studies to this journal even if neural mechanisms are discussed in the Introduction and Discussion.
3
10/13/2017 20:42:04Yes55Overcoming motor “forgetting” through reinforcement of learned actions
L Shmuelof, VS Huang, AM Haith, RJ Delnicki, P Mazzoni, JW Krakauer
Journal of Neuroscience 32 (42), 14617-14621a

Evidence for hyperbolic temporal discounting of reward in control of movements
AM Haith, TR Reppert, R Shadmehr
Journal of neuroscience 32 (34), 11727-11736

The influence of movement preparation time on the expression of visuomotor learning and savings
AM Haith, DM Huberdeau, JW Krakauer
Journal of neuroscience 35 (13), 5109-5117

Independence of movement preparation and movement initiation
AM Haith, J Pakpoor, JW Krakauer
Journal of Neuroscience 36 (10), 3007-3015

Persistent residual errors in motor adaptation tasks: reversion to baseline and exploratory escape
PA Vaswani, L Shmuelof, AM Haith, RJ Delnicki, VS Huang, P Mazzoni, ...
Journal of Neuroscience 35 (17), 6969-6977
n/aNo
4
10/13/2017 20:45:41Yes50Highly cited No
5
10/13/2017 20:50:31Yes53PMID:7472515, 9006989, 23616564PMID:18077686, 28450538Yes10I don't think it appropriate to reject any manuscript just because it is without neural data. Top journals like Nature, Nature Human Behaviour, and Current Biology still publishes pure behavioural studies but still with a great impact. JNS is missing a chance to publish many good papers in the field.
6
10/13/2017 20:55:42Yes32Serotonin affects movement gain in the spinal cordYes1010
7
10/13/2017 21:12:28Yes73Sanes, J. N. and E. V. Evarts (1983) Effects of perturbations on accuracy of arm movements. Journal of Neuroscience 3:977-986.
Sanes, J. N. (1986) Kinematics and end-point control of arm movements are modified by unexpected changes in viscous loading. Journal of Neuroscience 6:3120-3127.
Donoghue, J. P. and J. N. Sanes (1988) Organization of adult motor cortex representation patterns following neonatal nerve injury in rats. Journal of Neuroscience 8:3221-3232.
Bhat, R. B. and J. N. Sanes (1998) Cognitive channels computing action distance and direction. Journal of Neuroscience, 18:7566-7580.
Maynard, E. M., N. G. Hatsopoulos, C. L. Ojakangas, B. D. Acuna, J. N., Sanes, R. A. Normann and J. P. Donoghue (1999) Neuronal interactions improve cortical population coding of movement direction. Journal of Neuroscience, 19:8083-8093.
Baker, J. T., J. P. Donoghue and J. N. Sanes (1999) Gaze direction modulates finger movement activation patterns in human cerebral cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 19:10044-10052.
Eliassen, J. C., T. Souza and J. N. Sanes (2003) Experience-dependent activation patterns in human brain during visual-motor associative learning. Journal of Neuroscience, 23:10540-10547.
Sanes, J. N. and E. V. Evarts (1983) Effects of perturbations on accuracy of arm movements. Journal of Neuroscience 3:977-986.
Sanes, J. N. (1986) Kinematics and end-point control of arm movements are modified by unexpected changes in viscous loading. Journal of Neuroscience 6:3120-3127.
Bhat, R. B. and J. N. Sanes (1998) Cognitive channels computing action distance and direction. Journal of Neuroscience, 18:7566-7580.

NoPlease refer to the E-mail message I sent you (Reza)
8
10/13/2017 21:17:10NoNo
9
10/13/2017 21:41:26Yes20NoI have only have older molecular/cell culture work published in JNeuro, but now do behavioral research. Unfortunately, due to the published policy, I decided not to submit any behavioral work thus far to JNeuro (even though I strongly feel behavior is a crucial and insightful metric to build and constrain testable hypotheses about neural circuits). JNeuro had been at the forefront of meaningful and highly cited motor behavior papers in the past, and I was sadden by their stance on behavior. Thank you for doing this survey.
10
10/13/2017 21:50:20Yes70Not sure what you mean here my papers in Journal of Neuroscience can be found by searching Prado MAM
Not sure what you mean here
No
11
10/13/2017 21:58:15Yes2027852780, 17596454 (PMID)Yes111) Date; (24/4/2012)

I am sorry to report that we are unable to publish your paper, "Ready Steady Slow - Action preparation slows the subjective passage of time" (JN-RM-1956-12) in The Journal of Neuroscience. Space limitations allow us to publish only a minority of the manuscripts we receive. Accordingly, we are only able to accept papers that are judged to be both scientifically excellent and of particularly broad interest and significance.

We have made a decision about your paper without reviews, because your Reviewing Editor, Ivan Toni, and I think that the paper is better suited for a more specialized journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience. It is, unfortunately, the case that it is not possible for us to consider manuscripts where the emphasis is on behavior. It is important that manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Neuroscience provide a substantial insight into neural mechanisms. You should understand that our decision was not based on the quality of the science represented in the paper. Because we have to reject a large majority of the papers that we receive, we often make prompt editorial decisions when we think that The Journal is really not the right place for a particular paper.

Because we did not send your paper for review, you will be credited for your submission fee.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider the paper for publication in The Journal of Neuroscience.

Yours sincerely,

Senior Editor
Journal of Neuroscience

2) Another informal inquiry with the editor for our different paper (12/4/2016)
I am afraid that it has become much rarer for behaviour only manuscripts to be sent out for review at The Journal of Neuroscience. Personally I think that such studies can be important but there needs to be support from at least three editors before they are sent out for review so I am not sure if yours will be sent out for review. If you try and take this route then I would suggest that you try to clarify in the Discussion how the results have an implication for understanding neural processes as clearly as possible and explain what predictions your findings will make in other neural data experiments.
To understand how the brain works, we have to understand the structure of the information processing and predict the behaviour before jumping to see the neural correlates of it. Therefore, I believe behavioural research is a fundamental part of neuroscience. It is sad to see one of the journal I respect is underestimating the value of behavoural neuroscience.
12
10/13/2017 22:00:58NoYes11The editor informed me that the journal was moving away from publishing computational / behavioral work. I should also note that I had two very positive reviews from PLoS Computational Biology, where we recently published these set of experiments (2017).
13
10/13/2017 22:10:07NoYes102015. Space limitations allow us to publish only a minority of the manuscripts we receive. Accordingly, we are only able to accept papers that are judged to be both scientifically excellent and of particularly broad interest and significance.
We have made a decision about your paper without reviews after careful consideration by two or more Reviewing Editors. The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a more clinically oriented or motor oriented journal that for The Journal of Neuroscience with its focus on basic neural mechanisms. Because we have to reject a large majority of the papers that we receive, we often make prompt editorial decisions when we think that The Journal is really not the right place for a particular paper.
14
10/13/2017 23:02:30NoNo
15
10/13/2017 23:07:00Yes82Adaptation to visuomotor transformations: consolidation, interference, and forgetting.
Krakauer JW, Ghez C, Ghilardi MF.
J Neurosci. 2005 Jan 12;25(2):473-8.
PMID: 15647491

Learning of visuomotor transformations for vectorial planning of reaching trajectories.
Krakauer JW, Pine ZM, Ghilardi MF, Ghez C.
J Neurosci. 2000 Dec 1;20(23):8916-24.
PMID: 11102502
Neural and behavioral correlates of extended training during sleep deprivation in humans: evidence for local, task-specific effects.
Bernardi G, Siclari F, Yu X, Zennig C, Bellesi M, Ricciardi E, Cirelli C, Ghilardi MF, Pietrini P, Tononi G.
J Neurosci. 2015 Mar 18;35(11):4487-500. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4567-14.2015.
PMID: 25788668

Improved sequence learning with subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation: evidence for treatment-specific network modulation.
Mure H, Tang CC, Argyelan M, Ghilardi MF, Kaplitt MG, Dhawan V, Eidelberg D.
J Neurosci. 2012 Feb 22;32(8):2804-13. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4331-11.2012.
PMID: 22357863

Modulation of gamma and theta spectral amplitude and phase synchronization is associated with the development of visuo-motor learning.
Perfetti B, Moisello C, Landsness EC, Kvint S, Lanzafame S, Onofrj M, Di Rocco A, Tononi G, Ghilardi MF.
J Neurosci. 2011 Oct 12;31(41):14810-9. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1319-11.2011.
PMID: 21994398

Dopaminergic striatal innervation predicts interlimb transfer of a visuomotor skill.
Isaias IU, Moisello C, Marotta G, Schiavella M, Canesi M, Perfetti B, Cavallari P, Pezzoli G, Ghilardi MF.
J Neurosci. 2011 Oct 12;31(41):14458-62. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3583-11.2011.
PMID: 21994362

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation enhances BDNF-TrkB signaling in both brain and lymphocyte.
Wang HY, Crupi D, Liu J, Stucky A, Cruciata G, Di Rocco A, Friedman E, Quartarone A, Ghilardi MF.
J Neurosci. 2011 Jul 27;31(30):11044-54. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2125-11.2011.
PMID: 21795553

Dopaminergic suppression of brain deactivation responses during sequence learning.
Argyelan M, Carbon M, Ghilardi MF, Feigin A, Mattis P, Tang C, Dhawan V, Eidelberg D.
J Neurosci. 2008 Oct 15;28(42):10687-95. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2933-08.2008.
PMID: 18923044
Yes22I do not have the comments. The years were 2009, 2011
16
10/13/2017 23:23:18Yes20Yes42
17
10/13/2017 23:38:00Yes11Samuel D. McDougle, Krista M. Bond, & Jordan A. Taylor (2015)
Explicit and Implicit Processes Constitute the Fast and Slow Processes of Sensorimotor
Learning.
Journal of Neuroscience, 35(26): 9568-9579.
NoThanks for doing this Reza,
-Sam M
18
10/14/2017 0:00:35Yes20N/A21 &13NoOne of my paper, which had only behavioral contents without neural data, was rejected by the reviewer’s suggestion that it did not contain the neural data. Editor followed this suggestion.
19
10/14/2017 0:08:27Yes30No
20
10/14/2017 0:14:24Yes10Yes20 Although my personal experience included neural data, I definitely share the impression. Quite a few journals including j neurosci are rejecting papers at the editorial stage and I have a sense behavioral studies are being excluded more; also agree that this is not wise for the journal.
21
10/14/2017 0:23:06NoNo
22
10/14/2017 1:34:25Yes10Khan AZ, Heinen SJ, McPeek RM. (2010) Attentional cueing at the saccade goal, not at the target location, facilitates saccades. Journal of Neuroscience, 30(16): 5481-5488. [pdf]Yes112014 I am sorry to report that we have decided your manuscript is not suitable for publication in The Journal of Neuroscience. Space limitations allow us to publish only a minority of the manuscripts we receive. Accordingly, we are only able to accept papers that are judged to be both scientifically excellent and of particularly broad interest and significance. We will not consider a revised version of your manuscript.

Although the reviewers made some positive comments about your paper, their overall enthusiasm was not sufficient to allow further consideration. In coming to our decision, we were aware that you could make revisions that would address some of the reviewers' specific comments. However, our overall assessment of the paper leads us to conclude that it is better suited for a more specialized journal.
23
10/14/2017 1:40:12Yes101Schechtman, laufer, paz, 2010paz rony as authorNoIt will be a huge mistake to give any kind of low priority to behavioral/psychphysics/cognitive only studies! These papers are the basics of neuroscience . After all, this is what we aim to understand : human (or an8mal) behavior! Moreover, even as an electrophysiologist, i would say without hesitation that the contribution of purely behavioral papers to our understanding of computations in the brain is huge, and equal to that of invasive studies. Sometimes it is even more convincing to draw a conclusion about the neural correlates by observing the behavior, than by observing the actual neural correlate. this is due to two main factors: 1. Limitations and technical confounds of the physiological measures; 2. The superiority of a clean targeted well-thought-of purely behavioral design, compared to when compromised when one need to accommodate technological confounds of physiological methods.
To sum, behavioral and psychophysics is, almost by definition, the foundation of neurosciences.
24
10/14/2017 1:46:43NoYes112017. " For behavioral studies, our criteria have evolved to require that a behavioral study provides novel insights into the underlying neural mechanisms. In this case, the editors feel that this study does not provide sufficiently novel or direct insights into neural representations or neural mechanisms to be a good fit for the Journal. "I was very upset that we paid a submission fee and weren't reviewed. Not planning to submit there again.
25
10/14/2017 2:11:44NoYes55
26
10/14/2017 2:40:45NoYes34I am sorry to report that we are unable to publish your paper, "XXXX" (JN-RM-XXX) in The Journal of Neuroscience.

As part of an effort to become more selective, we have recently moved to using editorial review as a first screen of submitted papers in order to get a more rapid response to authors on papers that we believe will not meet our editorial criteria or the scope of the Journal. This has resulted in a smaller proportion of manuscripts that progress to full review and less delay in moving papers to consideration in other venues. We made a decision about your paper without external review after careful consideration by, and consultation among, two or more Reviewing Editors and myself. The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a more specialized journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience. For purely behavioral studies, our criteria have evolved to require that a behavioral study provides novel insights into the underlying neural representations and mechanisms. In this case, the editors don't feel that this study provides sufficiently
specific or direct insights into neural representations or neural mechanisms to be a good fit for the Journal.
Thanks Reza for doing this ....

I have tried several times to publish one of my (behavioural / cognitive / computational) papers in JN, "always" without success. Some of these rejected papers are now amongst my most citied articles with well over 100 citations in the last 5 to 10 years. In early days JN editors rejected papers after the review process and after receiving constructive and mostly positive sets of comments, but for similar reasons - not appropriate for the journal as mostly behavioural ... That was even more annoying as it meant a massive waste of time and felt even more unfair. Now they have changed their policy to reject such papers up front, which does not make it better but at least saves time and the submission fee. As a result of all this, I gave up submitting papers to JN or reviewing for them, a position which I also advertised to colleagues who came to me asking for advice whether they should consider JN as an outlet for their own work. My feeling has become that submitting papers that are mostly behavioural/computational to JN is a waste of time and effort.

27
10/14/2017 3:05:58NoYes33
28
10/14/2017 3:07:45NoYes11As part of an effort to become more selective, we have recently moved to using editorial review as a first screen of submitted papers in order to get a more rapid response to authors on papers that we believe will not meet our editorial criteria or the scope of the Journal. This has resulted in a smaller proportion of manuscripts that progress to full review and less delay in moving papers to consideration in other venues. We made a decision about your paper without external review after careful consideration by, and consultation among, two or more Reviewing Editors and myself. The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a more specialized journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience. For purely behavioral studies, our criteria have evolved to require that a behavioral study provides novel insights into the underlying neural mechanisms. In this case, the editors feel that this study does not provide sufficiently novel or direct
insights into neural representations or neural mechanisms to be a good fit for the Journal. (2016)
29
10/14/2017 3:34:29Yes10R Leib, F Mawase, A Karniel, O Donchin, J Rothwell, I Nisky, M Davare
Journal of Neuroscience 36 (41), 10545-10559
Yes221) (2015) The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a more specialized journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience. For purely behavioral studies, our criteria have evolved to require that a behavioral study provides novel insights into the underlying neural mechanisms. In this case, the editors feel that this study does not provide sufficiently novel or direct insights into neural representations or neural mechanisms to be a good fit for the Journal.
2) (2016) In addition it is still not clear how the results relate to an underlying neural mechanism and I am afraid that neural mechanisms are an important focus for The Journal of Neuroscience. I am very sorry but we are not able to send the manuscript out for re-review once again at The Journal of Neuroscience.
One possibility might be to transfer the manuscript to eNeuro. If the editors at eNeuro decide to send the manuscript out for review then it may be possible to have an expedited review by the same reviewers.
One of the thoughts that I had when being invited to submit my ms to eNeuro instead of J Neurosci is that it just does not make sense that the Society still considers the behavioral studies neuroscience enough to invite us to publish in eNeuro, just not one of enough quality to be published in J Neurosci. It is especially disappointing for me as a young PI and for my students to be at such point of disadvantage...
30
10/14/2017 3:36:41Yes1022014 paper=103 citations; 2015 paper=20 citationsmatched years for control purposes: 2014 paper=37 citations; 2015 paper=17 citationsYes10Would be great to get good sample to compare citation counts of behav vs neural papers from same PI. Very important issue-- thanks for taking it on.
31
10/14/2017 3:47:32NoNo
32
10/14/2017 5:12:13NoNoCould just be speculative....
33
10/14/2017 6:41:47Yes33J Neurosci. 2005 Apr 13;25(15):3919-31; J Neurosci. 2012 Nov 14;32(46):16274-84.; J Neurosci. 2013 Mar 6;33(10):4594-604; J Neurosci. 2005 Apr 13;25(15):3919-31: 30 times pubmed: ; J Neurosci. 2012 Nov 14;32(46):16274-84 : 5 times pubmed; J Neurosci. 2013 Mar 6;33(10):4594-604: 12 times pubmed; NoThis is a very good initiative; I have not submitted to the J Neurosci in the last couple of years, therefore my last answer is not representative; but to Brain - and there the same thing is happening.
34
10/14/2017 6:48:04NoYes11
2017) As part of an effort to become more selective, we have moved to using editorial review as a first screen of submitted papers in order to get a more rapid response to authors on papers that we believe will not meet our editorial criteria or the scope of the Journal. This has resulted in a smaller proportion of manuscripts that progress to full review and less delay in moving papers to consideration in other venues. We made a decision about your paper without external review after careful consideration by, and consultation among, two or more Reviewing Editors and myself. The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a more specialized journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience. For behavioral studies, our criteria have evolved to require that a behavioral study provides novel insights into the underlying neural mechanisms. In this case, the editors feel that this study does not provide sufficiently novel or direct insights into neural representations or neural mechanisms to be a good fit for the Journal.
I felt that the change in publicing policy may be related with the change in submission fees (now not refundable after rejection).
35
10/14/2017 6:55:46NoNo
36
10/14/2017 7:30:12Yes66PMID: 8778306, 10516324, 11487669, 17855611, 20392960, 27488645Yes66"We have made a decision without external review that your paper is not appropriate for The Journal of Neuroscience after careful consideration by two or more Reviewing Editors and myself."; "the implications for the underlying neural mechanisms of motor learning remain somewhat unclear. "; "For purely behavioral studies, our criteria have evolved to require that a behavioral study provides novel insights into the underlying neural mechanisms. In this case, the editors feel that this study does not provide sufficiently novel or direct insights into neural representations or neural mechanisms to be a good fit for the Journal. "; "We have made a decision about your paper without reviews, because your Reviewing Editor, Ivan Toni, and I think that the paper is better suited for a more specialized journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience."Reza, thank you for doing this. My experience with J. Neurosci. in recent years has been infuriating. They simply don't want to send my work out for review. As a result I have stopped sending manuscripts there altogether. Many of the papers I would have sent to J. Neurosci. have instead been published at journals such as J. Neurophysiol., Current Biology, PLoS Comp Biol., Eur. J. Neurosci., Cortex, J. Cogn. Neurosci. I think your take on the situation is exactly right—the approach J. Neurosci. has taken is bias pure and simple, and it perpetuates the myth that behavioural work is somehow less valuable, less impactful, less relevant to neural mechanisms than other methods. It's counterproductive for progress in neuroscience to perpetuate that myth. For the flagship journal of the Society for Neuroscience to decide that behavioural work "doesn't count" or "isn't worthy" is fantastically stupid. Thanks Reza for doing this. -Paul Gribble
37
10/14/2017 7:52:29Yes62PMIDs:, 24741046, 12904459 (behavior only), 26888928 (pharm manipulation + behavior)PMIDs: 26490859 (behavior + EMG) 20881112, 18842896 (behavior + neural rec)No
38
10/14/2017 7:57:32NoNoI have not personally submitted (yet?) to J Neurosci. A main reason has been my perception that my behavioral (more biomechanical / computational) work would not be well received for the very reasons Reza has outlined, even though I believe our work offers significant insights into motor control. We have instead published several very highly cited papers elsewhere (PLoS Comp. Biol., J. Neurophysiol., etc.). I do still regard J. Neurosci. highly. I suspect any drop in impact factor is due to competition of other journals (Frontiers & PLoS especially) and *not* to declining quality of the content. It would indeed be exceptionally unfortunate if journal editorial policy were to slant to chase particular metrics (i.e., the journal-level equivalent of "p-hacking") rather than real long-term scientific discovery/impact.
39
10/14/2017 8:04:33NoYes332015 - The overall consensus was that while your paper reported interesting results it might be more appropriate for a journal more focused on motor behavior than for The Journal of Neuroscience. Because we have to reject a large majority of the papers that we receive, we often make prompt editorial decisions when we think that The Journal is really not the right place for a particular paper.

2015 - Our goal is to publish all important advances in neural mechanisms and theories of brain function. As long as behavioral studies make a significant contribution to innovative insights about neural function, particularly when accompanied by a quantitative conceptual framework such that it can be generalizable to multiple systems, behavioral papers will always belong to JN.

2016 - Although the Reviewing Editors noted the care with which the work had been conducted they expressed concern about the degree to which the findings could be linked to neural mechanisms which are the key focus for The Journal of Neuroscience. I am very sorry but the overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a journal more specifically focused on motor behavior than for the The Journal of Neuroscience.
40
10/14/2017 8:15:13Yes11Maij, F., Brenner, E., & Smeets, J. B. J. (2011). Temporal uncertainty separates flashes from their background during saccades. Journal of Neuroscience, 31(10), 3708-3711. doi:10.1523/jneurosci.5097-10.2011Yes30I am afraid that the citation culture in the psychophysical work (papers get cited generally for many years, but it takes frequently some time to get to the citations) indeed does not help the impact factor of a journal as much as the short-lived molecular work. See my page http://personal.fgb.vu.nl/~jsmeets/Impact.html But journals should look beyond the impact factor.
41
10/14/2017 8:53:37NoYes44
42
10/14/2017 8:55:50NoNoIt's a solid journal and I plan on publishing in it.
43
10/14/2017 8:57:01Yes22Ranganathan, R., Adewuyi, A., & Mussa-Ivaldi, F. A. (2013). Learning to be lazy: exploiting redundancy in a novel task to minimize movement-related effort. Journal of Neuroscience, 33(7), 2754-2760.

Ranganathan, R., Wieser, J., Mosier, K. M., Mussa-Ivaldi, F. A., & Scheidt, R. A. (2014). Learning redundant motor tasks with and without overlapping dimensions: facilitation and interference effects. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(24), 8289-8299.
Yes112015 - In this case, the editors feel that this behavioral study does not provide enough direct insights into neural mechanisms or neural models to make it a good fit for the Journal.
44
10/14/2017 9:00:45Yes102Both papers focus on the statistics of natural motion, and consider implications for neural coding -- with the 2015 including some explicit predictions,Statistics of the vestibular input experienced during natural self-motion: implications for neural processing.
Carriot J, Jamali M, Chacron MJ, Cullen KE.
J Neurosci. 2014

The increased sensitivity of irregular peripheral canal and otolith vestibular afferents optimizes their encoding of natural stimuli.
Schneider AD, Jamali M, Carriot J, Chacron MJ, Cullen KE.
J Neurosci. 2015 Apr 8;35(14):5522-36.
No
45
10/14/2017 9:05:56Yes21Stevenson et al... and Wallace, 2014. Multisensory temporal integration in autism spectrum disorders Stevenson, 2012. Using Functional Connectivity Analyses to Investigate the Bases of Autism Spectrum Disorders and Other Clinical Populations Yes30
46
10/14/2017 9:29:25Yes400365No
47
10/14/2017 9:34:48NoYes12I share your ideas. Thank you for your initiative. Congratulations for your blog. Sincerely, Emmanuel Guigon
48
10/14/2017 10:59:52NoNo
49
10/14/2017 11:00:22Yes1010Modulation of saccade vigor during value-based decision making. Thomas R. Reppert, Karolina M. Lempert, Paul W. Glimcher, and Reza Shadmehr (2015) Journal of Neuroscience, 35:15369-15378
Persistent residual errors in motor adaptation tasks: reversion to baseline and exploratory escape. Pavan A Vaswani, Lior Shmuelof, Adrian M Haith, RJ Delnicki, Vincent S Huang, Pietro Mazzoni, Reza Shadmehr, and John W Krakauer (2015) Journal of Neuroscience 35:6969-6977
Motor costs and the coordination of the two arms. Yousef Salimpour and Reza Shadmehr (2014) Journal of Neuroscience 34:1806-1818
Vigor of movements and the cost of time in decision making. Jennie ES Choi, Pavan A Vaswani, and Reza Shadmehr (2014) Journal of Neuroscience 34:1212-1223
Decay of motor memories in the absence of error. Pavan A Vaswani and Reza Shadmehr (2013) Journal of Neuroscience 33:7700-7709
Evidence for hyperbolic temporal discounting of reward in control of movements. AM Haith, TR Reppert, and R Shadmehr (2012) Journal of Neuroscience 32:11727-11736
Protection and expression of human motor memories. SE Pekny, SE Criscimagna-Hemminger, and R Shadmehr (2011) Journal of Neuroscience 31:13829-13839
A shared resource between declarative memory and motor memory. A Keisler and R Shadmehr (2010) Journal of Neuroscience 30:14915-14924
Temporal discounting of reward and the cost of time in motor control (2010). R Shadmehr, JJ Orban de Xivry, M Xu-Wilson, and TY Shih. Journal of Neuroscience 30:10507-10516
Changes in control of saccades during gain adaptation. V Ethier, DS Zee, and R Shadmehr (2008) Journal of Neuroscience 28:13929-13937
Online processing of uncertain information in visuomotor control. J Izawa and R Shadmehr (2008) Journal of Neuroscience 28:11360-11368
Consolidation patterns of human motor memory. SE Criscimagna-Hemminger and R Shadmehr (2008) Journal of Neuroscience 28:9610-9618
Adaptive control of saccades via internal feedback. H Chen-Harris, WM Joiner, V Ethier, DS Zee, and R Shadmehr (2008) Journal of Neuroscience 28:2804-2813
Motor adaptation as a process of reoptimization. J Izawa, T Rane, O Donchin, and R Shadmehr (2008) Journal of Neuroscience 28:2883-2891
Why does the brain predict sensory consequences of oculomotor commands? Optimal integration of the predicted and the actual sensory feedback. S Vaziri, J Diedrichsen, and R Shadmehr (2006) Journal of Neuroscience, 26:4188-4197
Quantifying generalization from trial-by-trial behavior of adaptive systems that learn with basis functions: Theory and experiments in human motor control. O Donchin, JT Francis, and R Shadmehr (2003) Journal of Neuroscience, 23:9032-9045
A real-time state predictor in motor control: study of saccadic eye movements during unseen reaching movements. G Ariff, O Donchin, T Nanayakkara, and R Shadmehr (2002) Journal of Neuroscience 22:7721-7729
Spatial generalization from learning dynamics of reaching movements. R Shadmehr and ZMK Moussavi (2000) Journal of Neuroscience, 20:7807-7815
Functional stages in the formation of human long-term motor memory. R Shadmehr and T Brashers-Krug (1997) Journal of Neuroscience 17:409-419
Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task. R Shadmehr and FA Mussa-Ivaldi (1994) Journal of Neuroscience 14:3208-3224
Postural force fields of the human arm and their role in generating multi-joint movements. R Shadmehr, FA Mussa-Ivaldi, E Bizzi (1993) Journal of Neuroscience 13(1):45-62
The neural feedback response to error as a teaching signal for the motor learning system. Scott Albert and Reza Shadmehr (2016) Journal of Neuroscience 36:4832-4845
Altering effort costs in Parkinson's disease with non-invasive cortical stimulation. Yousef Salimpour, Zoltan K Mari, and Reza Shadmehr (2015) Journal of Neuroscience, 35:12287-12302
Reward dependent modulation of movement variability. Sarah E Pekny, Jun Izawa, and Reza Shadmehr (2015) Journal of Neuroscience 35:4015-4024
Preparing to reach: selecting an adaptive long-latency feedback controller. MA Ahmadi-Pajouh, F Towhidkhah, and R Shadmehr (2012) Journal of Neuroscience 32:9537-9545
Cerebellar contributions to reach adaptation and learning sensory consequences of action. J Izawa, SE Criscimagna-Hemminger, and R Shadmehr (2012) Journal of Neuroscience 32:4230-4239
TMS perturbs saccade trajectories and unmasks an internal feedback controller for saccades. M Xu-Wilson, J Tian, R Shadmehr, and DS Zee (2011) Journal of Neuroscience, 31: 11537-1154
Cerebellar contributions to adaptive control of saccades in humans. M Xu-Wilson, H Chen-Harris, DS Zee, and R Shadmehr (2009) Journal of Neuroscience 29:12930-12939
Dissociating timing and coordination as functions of the cerebellum. J Diedrichsen, SE Criscimagna-Hemminger, and R Shadmehr (2007) Journal of Neuroscience, 27:6291-6301
Neural correlates of reach errors. J Diedrichsen, Y Hashambhoy, T Rane, and R Shadmehr (2005) Journal of Neuroscience 25:9919-9931
Electromyographic correlates of learning an internal model of reaching movements. KA Thoroughman and R Shadmehr (1999) Journal of Neuroscience 19:8573-8588
Yes22We have recently moved to using editorial review as a first screen of submitted papers in order to get a more rapid response to authors on papers that we believe will not meet our editorial criteria or the scope of the Journal. This has resulted in a smaller proportion of manuscripts that progress to full review and less delay in moving papers to consideration in other venues. We made a decision about your paper without external review after careful consideration by three Reviewing Editors and myself. Specifically, while the study is interesting well-presented, we felt that The Journal of Neuroscience is not the right venue because the findings do not inform us about or implicate a specific neural mechanism. The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for another journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience.

50
10/14/2017 11:10:25NoNo
51
10/14/2017 11:39:42Yes70No
52
10/14/2017 11:39:44Yes70No
53
10/14/2017 11:41:26Yes93
@article{ ISI:000253973600025,
Author = {Izawa, Jun and Rane, Tushar and Donchin, Opher and Shadmehr, Reza},
Title = {{Motor adaptation as a process of reoptimization}},
Journal = {{JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE}},
Year = {{2008}},
Volume = {{28}},
Number = {{11}},
Pages = {{2883-2891}},
Month = {{MAR 12}},
DOI = {{10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5359-07.2008}},
ISSN = {{0270-6474}},
ResearcherID-Numbers = {{Donchin, Opher/A-4389-2008
}},
ORCID-Numbers = {{Donchin, Opher/0000-0003-0963-4467
Rane, Tushar/0000-0002-5446-4164}},
Unique-ID = {{ISI:000253973600025}},
}

@article{ ISI:000185822200004,
Author = {Donchin, O and Francis, JT and Shadmehr, R},
Title = {{Quantifying generalization from trial-by-trial behavior of adaptive
systems that learn with basis functions: Theory and experiments in human
motor control}},
Journal = {{JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE}},
Year = {{2003}},
Volume = {{23}},
Number = {{27}},
Pages = {{9032-9045}},
Month = {{OCT 8}},
ISSN = {{0270-6474}},
ResearcherID-Numbers = {{Winstein, Carolee/A-8375-2008
Francis, Joseph /I-4984-2012
Donchin, Opher/A-4389-2008}},
ORCID-Numbers = {{Donchin, Opher/0000-0003-0963-4467}},
Unique-ID = {{ISI:000185822200004}},
}

@article{ ISI:000177622800044,
Author = {Ariff, G and Donchin, O and Nanayakkara, T and Shadmehr, R},
Title = {{A real-time state predictor in motor control: Study of saccadic eye
movements during unseen reaching movements}},
Journal = {{JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE}},
Year = {{2002}},
Volume = {{22}},
Number = {{17}},
Pages = {{7721-7729}},
Month = {{SEP 1}},
ISSN = {{0270-6474}},
ResearcherID-Numbers = {{Nanayakkara, Thrishantha/B-1504-2008
Donchin, Opher/A-4389-2008}},
ORCID-Numbers = {{Donchin, Opher/0000-0003-0963-4467}},
Unique-ID = {{ISI:000177622800044}},
}

@article{ ISI:000410560200018,
Author = {Haar, Shlomi and Dinstein, Ilan and Shelef, Ilan and Donchin, Opher},
Title = {{Effector-Invariant Movement Encoding in the Human Motor System}},
Journal = {{JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE}},
Year = {{2017}},
Volume = {{37}},
Number = {{37}},
Pages = {{9054-9063}},
Month = {{SEP 13}},
DOI = {{10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1663-17.2017}},
ISSN = {{0270-6474}},
ORCID-Numbers = {{Haar, Shlomi/0000-0003-2213-6585
shelef, ilan/0000-0002-8398-6455}},
Unique-ID = {{ISI:000410560200018}},
}

@article{ ISI:000410560200020,
Author = {Haar, Shlomi and Donchin, Opher and Dinstein, Ilan},
Title = {{Individual Movement Variability Magnitudes Are Explained by Cortical
Neural Variability}},
Journal = {{JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE}},
Year = {{2017}},
Volume = {{37}},
Number = {{37}},
Pages = {{9076-9085}},
Month = {{SEP 13}},
DOI = {{10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1650-17.2017}},
ISSN = {{0270-6474}},
ORCID-Numbers = {{Haar, Shlomi/0000-0003-2213-6585}},
Unique-ID = {{ISI:000410560200020}},
}

@article{ ISI:000388366000008,
Author = {Leib, Raz and Mawase, Firas and Karniel, Amir and Donchin, Opher and
Rothwell, John and Nisky, Ilana and Davare, Marco},
Title = {{Stimulation of PPC Affects the Mapping between Motion and Force Signals
for Stiffness Perception But Not Motion Control}},
Journal = {{JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE}},
Year = {{2016}},
Volume = {{36}},
Number = {{41}},
Pages = {{10545-10559}},
Month = {{OCT 12}},
DOI = {{10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1178-16.2016}},
ISSN = {{0270-6474}},
ORCID-Numbers = {{Nisky, Ilana/0000-0003-4128-9771}},
Unique-ID = {{ISI:000388366000008}},
}

@article{ ISI:000353647600016,
Author = {Haar, Shlomi and Donchin, Opher and Dinstein, Ilan},
Title = {{Dissociating Visual and Motor Directional Selectivity Using Visuomotor
Adaptation}},
Journal = {{JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE}},
Year = {{2015}},
Volume = {{35}},
Number = {{17}},
Pages = {{6813-6821}},
Month = {{APR 29}},
DOI = {{10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0182-15.2015}},
ISSN = {{0270-6474}},
ResearcherID-Numbers = {{Donchin, Opher/A-4389-2008
Dinstein, Ilan/L-3325-2016
}},
ORCID-Numbers = {{Donchin, Opher/0000-0003-0963-4467
Dinstein, Ilan/0000-0001-8106-5209
Haar, Shlomi/0000-0003-2213-6585}},
Unique-ID = {{ISI:000353647600016}},
}

@article{ ISI:000349669600011,
Author = {Haar, Shlomi and Givon-Mayo, Ronit and Barmack, Neal H. and Yakhnitsa,
Vadim and Donchin, Opher},
Title = {{Spontaneous Activity Does Not Predict Morphological Type in Cerebellar
Interneurons}},
Journal = {{JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE}},
Year = {{2015}},
Volume = {{35}},
Number = {{4}},
Pages = {{1432-1442}},
Month = {{JAN 28}},
DOI = {{10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5019-13.2015}},
ISSN = {{0270-6474}},
ResearcherID-Numbers = {{Donchin, Opher/A-4389-2008
}},
ORCID-Numbers = {{Donchin, Opher/0000-0003-0963-4467
Haar, Shlomi/0000-0003-2213-6585}},
Unique-ID = {{ISI:000349669600011}},
}

@article{ ISI:000311091000021,
Author = {Taig, Efrat and Kueper, Michael and Theysohn, Nina and Timmann, Dagmar
and Donchin, Opher},
Title = {{Deficient Use of Visual Information in Estimating Hand Position in
Cerebellar Patients}},
Journal = {{JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE}},
Year = {{2012}},
Volume = {{32}},
Number = {{46}},
Pages = {{16274-16284}},
Month = {{NOV 14}},
DOI = {{10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1153-12.2012}},
ISSN = {{0270-6474}},
ResearcherID-Numbers = {{Donchin, Opher/A-4389-2008}},
ORCID-Numbers = {{Donchin, Opher/0000-0003-0963-4467}},
Unique-ID = {{ISI:000311091000021}},
}
Yes31"We made a decision about your paper without external review after careful consideration by two Reviewing Editors and myself. The main concern of the editors is that the study does not directly address neural mechanisms which are the usual focus of articles in The Journal of Neuroscience. In this particular case, however, it was recognized that the potential conceptual novelty of the findings might outweigh such concerns. The manuscript might further attempt to discuss the possible neural mechanisms linked to the findings made or, more importantly, the potential future implications of the results for studying neural mechanisms. If you are prepared to do this then we would consider a revised version of the manuscript for review."

" We made a decision about your paper without external review after careful consideration by two Senior Editors and a Reviewing Editor. The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for another journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience. Specifically, we felt that there is a single finding that does not sufficiently extend our understanding of the mechanism of action of direct current stimulation."

"We have made a decision about your paper without reviews after careful consideration by two Reviewing Editors. The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a journal more focused on neurostimulation or for eNeuro than for The Journal of Neuroscience. Because we have to reject a large majority of the papers that we receive, we often make prompt editorial decisions when we think that The Journal is really not the right place for a particular paper. "
To me, it seems legitimate that The Journal of Neuroscience should decide to focus on papers with a specific effort to address neural mechanisms. The idea that purely behavioral studies represent neuroscience per se is certainly not a trivial one. I think it can be argued either way.
54
10/14/2017 11:59:24Yes10doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4382-05.2006Yes212017: The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a more specialized journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience. For behavioral studies, our criteria have evolved to require that a behavioral study provides novel insights into the underlying neural mechanisms. In this case, the editors feel that this study does not provide sufficiently novel or direct insights into neural representations or neural mechanisms to be a good fit for the Journal.


[I felt the last editor comment was unjustified, we did provide insight into neural mechanisms underlying attention through our behavioural work.]
Thanks for taking the effort for this.
55
10/14/2017 12:04:12NoNoSubmitted 2 behavioural papers previously to jneurosci. both got reviewed but eventually rejected.
56
10/14/2017 12:28:18NoYes11In this case, the editors feel that this behavioral study does not provide sufficient insights into neural mechanisms to be a good fit for the Journal. (2015)
57
10/14/2017 12:34:52Yes100No
58
10/14/2017 12:46:12Yes100probably a mean of 50Yes11i share your concerns. My papers usually are based on behavioural observations but then include some non-invasive recording/stimulating protocols
59
10/14/2017 14:32:20Yes2014/8 citationsYes11Were along the lines of the example you've given (cannot find email)
60
10/14/2017 15:03:20NoNo
61
10/14/2017 15:27:18Yes1180 citations in 10 yrN/AYes1124th Feb 2010
We have made a decision about your paper without reviews, because we do not think that the paper is appropriate for The Journal of Neuroscience.

It is our current editorial policy to only publish papers that discuss and inform specific neural mechanisms. Your manuscript does not. Its discussion of the brain is only a general level only. If you wish to revise your manuscript to discuss your results in the context of specific neural mechanisms, brain areas, etc., you can appeal our decision and we will consider a revised manuscript.
Good initiative! I hope it will be successful, and J Neurosci changes this ridiculous policy.
62
10/14/2017 16:17:12NoYes22All papers submitted were behavioural with computational models and all rejected with no peer review due to lack of neural data
63
10/14/2017 16:23:30Yes21J. Neurosci., 2002 vol. 22(20) pp. 9113-21
L-type voltage-gated calcium channels are required for extinction, but not for acquisition or expression, of conditional fear in mice
Cain, CK; Blouin, AM; Barad, M
J. Neurosci., 2014 vol. 34(44) pp. 14733-8
Taking action in the face of threat: neural synchronization predicts adaptive coping
Collins, KA; Mendelsohn, A; Cain, CK; Schiller, D
Yes30
64
10/14/2017 16:48:47NoYes11One reviewer and the editor criticism was that I did not show directly changes to spiral ganglion cells in a study that used human subjects! Completely ridiculous.
65
10/14/2017 17:07:28Yes31https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21734297https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22357860Yes73
66
10/14/2017 17:52:40Yes40Richardson AG, Overduin SA, Valero-Cabré A, Padoa-Schioppa C, Pascual-Leone A, Bizzi E and Press DZ (2006). Disruption of primary motor cortex prior to learning impairs memory of movement dynamics. Journal of Neuroscience 26, 12466-12470. PMCID 17135408

Padoa-Schioppa C (2009). Range-adapting representation of economic value in the orbitofrontal cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 29, 14004-14. PMCID 19890010

Cai X and Padoa-Schioppa C (2012). Neuronal encoding of subjective value in dorsal and ventral anterior cingulate cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 32, 3791-808. PMCID 22423100

Raghuraman A and Padoa-Schioppa C (2014). Integration of multiple determinants in the neuronal computation of economic values. Journal of Neuroscience 34, 11583-603. PMID 25164656
Yes10[...] Space limitations allow us to publish only a minority of the manuscripts we receive. Accordingly, we are only able to accept papers that are judged to be both scientifically excellent and of particularly broad interest and significance.

We have made a decision about your paper without reviews after careful consideration by two or more Reviewing Editors. The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a more specialized journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience. Because we have to reject a large majority of the papers that we receive, we often make prompt editorial decisions when we think that The Journal is really not the right place for a particular paper.
The paper that was reject without review was a computational modeling paper. I had the clear impression that it was rejected without serious consideration.
67
10/14/2017 18:01:13Yes21


Robert Hermosillo, Anina Ritterband-Rosenbaum and Paul van Donkelaar (2011) Predicting Future Sensorimotor States Influences Current Temporal Decision Making.
Journal of Neuroscience, 31 (27) 10019-10022.


Ji-Hang Lee and Paul van Donkelaar (2006) The Human Dorsal Premotor Cortex Generates On-Line Error Corrections during Sensorimotor Adaptation.
Journal of Neuroscience26 (12) 3330-3334.
NoI haven't submitted anything to JNeurosci recently so haven't had a desk rejection. It would be disappointing if purely behavioural studies that provide insight into brain function, even if only indirectly, are being rejected without review because of this policy.
68
10/14/2017 19:07:44NoNo
69
10/14/2017 19:13:16NoYes52
70
10/14/2017 20:29:57Yes50No
71
10/14/2017 23:59:22NoNo
72
10/15/2017 0:20:25NoYes22
73
10/15/2017 2:52:56Yes10No
74
10/15/2017 4:19:30Yes31Tanaka SC, Shishida K, Schweighofer N, Okamoto Y, Yamawaki S, Doya K. Serotonin affects association of aversive outcomes to past actions. The Journal of Neuroscience 29(50),pp.15669–74Tanaka SC, Balleine BW, O’Doherty JP. Calculating Consequences: Brain Systems That Encode the Causal Effects of Actions. The Journal of Neuroscience 28(26),pp.6750–6755

Tanaka SC, Yamada K, Yoneda H, Ohtake F. Neural Mechanisms of Gain–Loss Asymmetry in Temporal Discounting. The Journal of Neuroscience 34(16),pp.5595-5602.
No
75
10/15/2017 7:11:02Yes1010Scopus
EXPORT DATE:15 Oct 2017

Diamond, J.S., Nashed, J.Y., Johansson, R.S., Wolpert, D.M., Randall Flanagan, J.
Rapid visuomotor corrective responses during transport of hand-held objects incorporate novel object dynamics
(2015) Journal of Neuroscience, 35 (29), pp. 10572-10580. Cited 5 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84937687022&doi=10.1523%2fJNEUROSCI.1376-15.2015&partnerID=40&md5=889205139d672b1f580254f6ee5a015c

DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1376-15.2015
DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Trewartha, K.M., Garcia, A., Wolpert, D.M., Flanagan, J.R.
Fast but fleeting: Adaptive motor learning processes associated with aging and cognitive decline
(2014) Journal of Neuroscience, 34 (40), pp. 13411-13421. Cited 18 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84907545981&doi=10.1523%2fJNEUROSCI.1489-14.2014&partnerID=40&md5=958fe332ed1f0938030f81a3582aea43

DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1489-14.2014
DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Dimitriou, M., Wolpert, D.M., Franklin, D.W.
The temporal evolution of feedback gains rapidly update to task demands
(2013) Journal of Neuroscience, 33 (26), pp. 10898-10909. Cited 29 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84879287966&doi=10.1523%2fJNEUROSCI.5669-12.2013&partnerID=40&md5=458e2b51ec0ba5604c1ec3569d3e6988

DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5669-12.2013
DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Howard, I.S., Ingram, J.N., Franklin, D.W., Wolpert, D.M.
Gone in 0.6 seconds: The encoding of motor memories depends on recent sensorimotor states
(2012) Journal of Neuroscience, 32 (37), pp. 12756-12768. Cited 26 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84866235480&doi=10.1523%2fJNEUROSCI.5909-11.2012&partnerID=40&md5=0ccd182e9c0af5f382f94c1327bab75f

DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5909-11.2012
DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Selen, L.P.J., Shadlen, M.N., Wolpert, D.M.
Deliberation in the motor system: Reflex gains track evolving evidence leading to a decision
(2012) Journal of Neuroscience, 32 (7), pp. 2276-2286. Cited 72 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84857096684&doi=10.1523%2fJNEUROSCI.5273-11.2012&partnerID=40&md5=e5a1f595f50c51bd8adff41eed714489

DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5273-11.2012
DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Selen, L.P.J., Franklin, D.W., Wolpert, D.M.
Impedance control reduces instability that arises from motor noise
(2009) Journal of Neuroscience, 29 (40), pp. 12606-12616. Cited 74 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-70349876486&doi=10.1523%2fJNEUROSCI.2826-09.2009&partnerID=40&md5=b3c0097cec5d2a76dff3ff5c58638ede

DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2826-09.2009
DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Braun, D.A., Aertsen, A., Wolpert, D.M., Mehring, C.
Learning optimal adaptation strategies in unpredictable motor tasks
(2009) Journal of Neuroscience, 29 (20), pp. 6472-6478. Cited 52 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-66249115304&doi=10.1523%2fJNEUROSCI.3075-08.2009&partnerID=40&md5=64e6aa19818b020f5c085edbfb451d9e

DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3075-08.2009
DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Franklin, D.W., Wolpert, D.M.
Specificity of reflex adaptation for task-relevant variability
(2008) Journal of Neuroscience, 28 (52), pp. 14165-14175. Cited 89 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-58149391334&doi=10.1523%2fJNEUROSCI.4406-08.2008&partnerID=40&md5=cc9e9c415b057d3c146aaa6572259b92

DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4406-08.2008
DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Howard, I.S., Ingram, J.N., Wolpert, D.M.
Composition and decomposition in bimanual dynamic learning
(2008) Journal of Neuroscience, 28 (42), pp. 10531-10540. Cited 23 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-54849429030&doi=10.1523%2fJNEUROSCI.3473-08.2008&partnerID=40&md5=8844fe6d26e019611d4f0a7c8ce07990

DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3473-08.2008
DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Bays, P.M., Wolpert, D.M.
Actions and consequences in bimanual interaction are represented in different coordinate systems
(2006) Journal of Neuroscience, 26 (26), pp. 7121-7126. Cited 15 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-33745938843&doi=10.1523%2fJNEUROSCI.0943-06.2006&partnerID=40&md5=3db052ef7ac0fd30ba2d58491279053c

DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0943-06.2006
DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Davidson, P.R., Wolpert, D.M., Scott, S.H., Flanagan, J.R.
Common encoding of novel dynamic loads applied to the hand and arm
(2005) Journal of Neuroscience, 25 (22), pp. 5425-5429. Cited 16 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-20044376302&doi=10.1523%2fJNEUROSCI.0429-05.2005&partnerID=40&md5=32ba1bda4f0641e3eec220e98cb4e791

DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0429-05.2005
DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Caithness, G., Osu, R., Bays, P., Chase, H., Klassen, J., Kawato, M., Wolpert, D.M., Flanagan, J.R.
Failure to consolidate the consolidation theory of learning for sensorimotor adaptation tasks
(2004) Journal of Neuroscience, 24 (40), pp. 8662-8671. Cited 160 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-5444270048&doi=10.1523%2fJNEUROSCI.2214-04.2004&partnerID=40&md5=df9f7398709eb760b361df0ba8481306

DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2214-04.2004
DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Tong, C., Wolpert, D.M., Randall Flanagan, J.
Kinematics and dynamics are not represented independently in motor working memory: Evidence from an interference study
(2002) Journal of Neuroscience, 22 (3), pp. 1108-1113. Cited 141 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0036469963&partnerID=40&md5=665b95d4c5abbf141ec4b604a8542eb1

DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Blakemore, S.J., Goodbody, S.J., Wolpert, D.M.
Predicting the consequences of our own actions: The role of sensorimotor context estimation
(1998) Journal of Neuroscience, 18 (18), pp. 7511-7518. Cited 238 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0032531044&partnerID=40&md5=fc5851136457b19340f9ae67712209d5

DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus

Ghahramani, Z., Wolpert, D.M., Jordan, M.I.
Generalization to local remappings of the visuomotor coordinate transformation
(1996) Journal of Neuroscience, 16 (21), pp. 7085-7096. Cited 117 times.
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0029926566&partnerID=40&md5=35203bc5c3ba1571c058ab2dc58a542e

DOCUMENT TYPE: Article
SOURCE: Scopus
Yes11
76
10/15/2017 9:49:39Yes51Bizley, Shinn-Cunningham and Lee, 2012 32(39):13402–13410Bizley et al., 2008, 2009, Walker et al., 2011, Bizley and Walker 2010No
77
10/15/2017 13:20:55Yes11NoI've had two psychophysical papers rejected by JN on the basis of one review. In each case, the review was flawed and should have dismissed by the editor. Complaints were handled with the excuse that if the paper was right for JN, the journal would have been able to find two reviewers——and the paper lacked the essential 'direct evidence of underlying neurobiological mechanisms'. Like many clubs, SfN revels in its exclusivity, and hence needs some group to exclude.
78
10/15/2017 14:08:11Yes601: Kubanek J, Snyder LH. Reward-based decision signals in parietal cortex are
partially embodied. J Neurosci. 2015 Mar 25;35(12):4869-81. doi:
10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4618-14.2015. PubMed PMID: 25810518; PubMed Central PMCID:
PMC4389591.


2: Rao V, DeAngelis GC, Snyder LH. Neural correlates of prior expectations of
motion in the lateral intraparietal and middle temporal areas. J Neurosci. 2012
Jul 18;32(29):10063-74. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5948-11.2012. PubMed PMID:
22815520; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3410938.


3: Lawrence BM, Snyder LH. The responses of visual neurons in the frontal eye
field are biased for saccades. J Neurosci. 2009 Nov 4;29(44):13815-22. doi:
10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2352-09.2009. PubMed PMID: 19889993; PubMed Central PMCID:
PMC2826118.


4: Chang SW, Dickinson AR, Snyder LH. Limb-specific representation for reaching
in the posterior parietal cortex. J Neurosci. 2008 Jun 11;28(24):6128-40. doi:
10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1442-08.2008. PubMed PMID: 18550755; PubMed Central PMCID:
PMC2576478.


5: Snyder LH, Dickinson AR, Calton JL. Preparatory delay activity in the monkey
parietal reach region predicts reach reaction times. J Neurosci. 2006 Oct
4;26(40):10091-9. PubMed PMID: 17021165.


6: Quian Quiroga R, Snyder LH, Batista AP, Cui H, Andersen RA. Movement intention
is better predicted than attention in the posterior parietal cortex. J Neurosci.
2006 Mar 29;26(13):3615-20. PubMed PMID: 16571770.
Yes21"We do not, however, believe that your manuscript will generate sufficiently enthusiastic comments given its failure to speak in a direct way to neurobiological mechanisms." March 2014Might be other papers that I have missed. Generally, we publish mostly papers with neural data, but we do have a number that are "behavioral", and like you I would strongly argue that well-done behavioral work can provide just as clear insights into mechanism as studies with neural data.
79
10/15/2017 15:14:34Yes11Diedrichsen J, White O, Newman D, Lally N. Use-dependent and error-based learning of motor behaviors. J Neurosci. 30(15):5159-5166. 2010.Yes32Your Reviewing Editor, Timothy Ebner, and I have now received the reviews of your paper, "Predictive grip for high impact loads in altered gravity fields" (JN-RM-2410-06). I am sorry to report that we will not be able to publish the paper in the Journal of Neuroscience. Space limitations allow us to publish only a minority of the manuscripts we receive. Accordingly, we are only able to accept papers that are judged to be both scientifically excellent and of particularly broad interest and significance. Although the reviewers made some positive comments about your paper, their overall enthusiasm was not sufficient to allow further consideration. We think a revised version of your paper would be better suited for a more specialized journal.
YEAR=2009
80
10/15/2017 17:26:32Yes31Muscle coordination is habitual rather than optimal
A De Rugy, GE Loeb, TJ Carroll
Journal of Neuroscience 32 (21), 7384-7391
Visual attentional load influences plasticity in the human motor cortex
MR Kamke, MG Hall, HF Lye, MV Sale, LR Fenlon, TJ Carroll, S Riek, ...
Journal of Neuroscience 32 (20), 7001-7008

Visual spatial attention has opposite effects on bidirectional plasticity in the human motor cortex
MR Kamke, AE Ryan, MV Sale, MEJ Campbell, S Riek, TJ Carroll, ...
Journal of Neuroscience 34 (4), 1475-1480
Yes11more appropriate for a journal more focused on motor behavior than for the The Journal of Neuroscience with its focus on neural mechanismsAnother issue with the "requirement" for direct demonstration of neural mechanism is that it provides reviewers with an easy option to kill a paper if they don't like its message - "the paper is interesting but does not provide much neural mechanism" has become the new "I just don't think the paper is sufficiently important to warrant publication in JNS"

eg
As you will see from the reviews, the two reviewers differed considerably in their enthusiasm for the manuscript. In the end, the decisive factor in our judgment was the fact that both reviewers feel that the inferences that can be drawn regarding neural mechanisms are very limited (N.B., one did, the other made a passing comment that one aspect of the neural interpretation should be toned down). For behavioral studies, our editorial decision criteria have evolved to require that a behavioral study provides novel insights into the underlying neural mechanisms
81
10/15/2017 17:53:55Yes11Huang, H.J., Kram, R. Ahmed, A.A., “Reduction of metabolic cost during motor learning of arm reaching dynamics,” Journal of Neuroscience 32(6): 2182-2190 2012.
No
82
10/15/2017 18:46:13NoNo
83
10/15/2017 20:02:45NoYes112015: "your paper may be more appropriate for a journal more focused on motor behavior than for the The Journal of Neuroscience with its focus on neural mechanisms." 2015:"We realise that many studies have a bearing on perceptual, movement, and cognitive processes that are performed by neural systems and we realise that such work is important. Nevertheless, the focus of The Journal of Neuroscience is on the neural mechanisms and it is important that manuscripts submitted to The Journal of Neuroscience address such issues in a fairly direct manner or else that they produce such novel insights into behaviour that they are likely to change the manner in which studies more directly focused on neural mechanisms are conducted. This means that as fields emerge they might initially be appropriate for The Journal of Neuroscience but then become more specialized."I am now completely disinclined to submit to Journal of Neuroscience.
84
10/15/2017 20:39:12NoNoThis new policy is getting me very close to decide to submit my latest results on a different journal, although the original idea was to try JN.
85
10/15/2017 20:53:15Yes519, 31, 56, 94, and 132 in Web of ScienceYes22

We have recently moved to using editorial review as a first screen of submitted papers in order to get a more rapid response to authors on papers that we believe might not meet the scope of the Journal. This has resulted in a smaller proportion of manuscripts that progress to full review and less delay in moving papers to consideration in other venues. We made a decision about your paper without external review after careful consideration by two Reviewing Editors. The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a journal more focused on motor behavior than for The Journal of Neuroscience with its focus on neural mechanisms.

In addition, because we did not send your paper for review, you will be credited for your submission fee.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider the paper for publication in The Journal of Neuroscience.

86
10/16/2017 0:03:29Yes65Yokoi A, Hirashima M, Nozaki D (2014) Lateralized sensitivity of motor memories to the kinematics of the opposite arm reveals functional specialization during bimanual actions. Journal of Neuroscience 34:9141-9151

Ikegami T, Hirashima M, Osu R, Nozaki D (2012) Intermittent visual feedback can boost motor learning of rhythmic movements: evidence for error feedback beyond cycles, Journal of Neuroscience 32:653-657

Yokoi A, Hirashima M, Nozaki D (2011) Gain field encoding of the kinematics of both arms in the internal model enables exible bimanual action. Journal of Neuroscience 31:17058-1706

Ikegami T, Hirashima M, Taga G, Nozaki D (2010) Asymmetric transfer of visuomotor learning between discrete and rhythmic movements. Journal of Neuroscience 30:4515-4521

Miyazaki M, Hirashima M, Nozaki D (2010) The "cutaneous rabbit" hopping out of the body. Journal of Neuroscience 30:1856-1860
Kadota H, Hirashima M, Nozaki D (2014) Functional modulation of corticospinal excitability with adaptation of wrist movements to novel dynamical environments. Journal of Neuroscience 34:12415-12424Yes112016: "We have recently moved to using editorial review as a first screen of submitted papers in order to get a more rapid response to authors on papers that we believe will not meet our editorial criteria or the scope of the Journal. This has resulted in a smaller proportion of manuscripts that progress to full review and less delay in moving papers to consideration in other venues. We made a decision about your paper without external review after careful consideration by two Reviewing Editors. Unfortunately while both Reviewing Editors noted the care with the study had been conducted they both argued that it did not provide a mechanistic insight into brain processes. The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a journal more focused on motor behavior than for The Journal of Neuroscience with its focus on neural mechanisms. "
We received the editorial decision within 2 days after the submission. It was obvious that they did not see the content of the manuscript but merely check if it adopted behavioral experiments only. I think it is stupid if the rejection is determined by the methods employed.
87
10/16/2017 1:48:12Yes62Shmuelof L, Huang V, Haith A, Delnicki RJ, Mazzoni P, Krakauer JW. 2012. Overcoming motor “forgetting” through reinforcement of learned actions. Journal of Neuroscience 32: 14617-14621.
Vaswani P, Shmuelof L, Haith A, Delnicki R, Huang V, Mazzoni P, Shadmehr R, Krakauer J. 2015. Exploratory escape from persistent residual errors in motor adaptation tasks. Journal of Neuroscience 35: 6969-6977.

Shmuelof L, Zohary E. 2006. A mirror representation of others' action in the human anterior parietal cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 26: 9736-9742.
Eisenberg M, Shmuelof L, Vaadia E, Zohary E. 2011. The Representation of Visual and Motor Aspects of Reaching Movements in the Human Motor Cortex. Journal of Neuroscience 31:12377-12384.
Eisenberg M, Shmuelof L, Vaadia E, Zohary E. 2010. Functional Organization of Human Motor Cortex: Directional Selectivity for Movement. Journal of Neuroscience 30: 8897-8905.
Mawase F, Bar-Haim S, Shmuelof L. Formation of long-term locomotor memories is associated with functional connectivity changes in the cerebellar-thalamic-cortical network. 2017. Journal of Neuroscience 37(2):349-361.
Yes32For purely behavioral studies, our criteria have evolved to require that a behavioral study provides novel insights into the underlying neural mechanisms. In this case, the editors feel that this study does not provide sufficiently novel or direct
insights into neural representations or neural mechanisms to be a good fit for the Journal.
Dear Reza, we have also noticed this change in policy in JNS. we appreciate your work on this matter. best wishes, Lior
88
10/16/2017 1:58:52Yes1021(15):5813-23.Yes11The main concern of the editors is that the study does not directly address neural mechanisms which are the usual focus of articles in The Journal of Neuroscience. (2017)
89
10/16/2017 2:06:14NoNoIf Journal of Neuroscience really wants to exclude papers about system neuroscience, a more straightforward way to do it may be changing its name to Journal of Neuron Science or Journal of micro-Neuroscience. I believe both a macroscopic (i.e. systematic) point of view and a microscopic point of view are essential to understand the mechanism of the brain in a future.
90
10/16/2017 4:30:59Yes72Baddeley R.J, Ingram H.A. & Miall RC (2003) System identification applied to a visuomotor task: near optimal human performance in a noisy changing task.
J. Neurosci. 23: 3066-3075

Ronsse R, Miall RC, Swinnen S. (2009) Multisensory integration in dynamical behaviours: maximum likelihood estimation across bimanual skill learning. J. Neurosci, 29: 8419-8428
Lesage E, Hansen PC & Miall RC (2017) The right lateral cerebellum represents linguistic predictability. J Neurosci. (in press)
Panouilleres M, Miall RC, Jenkinson N. (2015) The role of the posterior cerebellum in saccadic adaptation: a Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation study. J Neurosci. 35: 5471-5479
Sami S, Robertson EM, Miall RC (2014) The time course of task-specific memory consolidation effects in resting state networks. J Neuroscience, 34: 3982-92.
Balslev D & Miall RC (2008) Eye position representation in human anterior parietal cortex. J Neurosci. 28: 8968-8972.
Balslev D, Christensen LOD, Lee JH, Law I, Paulson OB, Miall RC (2004) Enhanced accuracy in novel mirror drawing following rTMS-induced proprioceptive deafferentation. J Neurosci, 24: 9698-9702.


Yes33As part of an effort to become substantially more selective, we have recently moved to using editorial review as a first screen of submitted papers in order to get a more rapid response to authors on papers that we believe will not meet our editorial criteria or the scope of the Journal. This has resulted in a smaller proportion of manuscripts that progress to full review and less delay in moving papers to consideration in other venues. We made a decision about your paper without external review after careful consideration by two or more Reviewing Editors and myself. The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a more specialized journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience. In this case, the editors feel that the study does not provide sufficiently direct insights into neural mechanisms to be a good fit for the Journal.

We have made a decision about your paper without reviews, because your Reviewing Editor, Ivan Toni, and I think that the paper is better suited for a more specialized journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience. You should understand that our decision was not based on the quality of the science represented in the paper. Because we have to reject a large majority of the papers that we receive, we often make prompt editorial decisions when we think that The Journal is really not the right place for a particular paper.

(Have no text from the third rejection)
I will be interested to hear the outcome of your survey, Reza.
91
10/16/2017 4:41:53Yes77Franklin DW, Reichenbach A, Franklin S, Diedrichsen J. Temporal evolution of spatial computations for visuomotor control. Journal of Neuroscience. 36, 2329-2341 (2016).
Dimitriou M, Wolpert DM and Franklin DW. The temporal evolution of feedback gains rapidly update to task demands. Journal of Neuroscience, 3(26): 10898–10909 (2013).
Howard IS, Ingram JN, Franklin DW and Wolpert DM. Gone in 0.6 seconds: the encoding of motor memories depends on recent sensorimotor states. Journal of Neuroscience, 32, 12756-12768 (2012).
Selen LPJ, Franklin DW, and Wolpert DM. Impedance control reduces instability that arises from motor noise. Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 12606-12616 (2009).
Franklin DW, and Wolpert DM. Specificity of reflex adaptation for task-relevant variability. Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 14165-14175 (2008).
Franklin DW, Burdet E, Tee KP, Osu R, Chew CM, Milner TE, and Kawato M. CNS learns stable, accurate, and efficient movements using a simple algorithm. Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 11165-11173 (2008).
Franklin DW, Liaw G, Milner TE, Osu, R, Burdet E, and Kawato M. Endpoint stiffness of the arm is directionally tuned to instability in the environment. Journal of Neuroscience, 27, 7705-7716 (2007).
Yes11Both Reviewing Editors noted that the study had been conducted carefully and that the findings would be of interest to other researchers working on motor learning. However, both Reviewing Editors argued that because the study did not examine neural data directly that it was outside the scope of The Journal of Neuroscience. (2016)
92
10/16/2017 7:34:42NoNo
93
10/16/2017 8:41:18NoYes10
94
10/16/2017 8:54:16Yes50Hamada M, Galea J.M, Lazzaro V, Mazzone M, Ziemann U, Rothwell JC. The role of two separate motor cortex interneuron circuits in different forms of human physiological and behavioural plasticity. Journal of Neuroscience 34(38):12837-49.

Galea J.M, Ruge D, Buijink A, Bestmann S & Rothwell J.C. Punishment induced behavioural and neurophysiological variability reveals dopamine-dependent selection of kinematic movement parameters. Journal of Neuroscience 33(9):3981-8.

Schlerf J, Galea J.M, Bastian A.J & Celnik P. Dynamic modulation of cerebellar excitability for abrupt, but not gradual visuomotor adaptation. Journal of Neuroscience 32(34):11610-7.

Galea J.M, Bestmann S, Beigi M, Jahanshahi M & Rothwell J.C. Action reprogramming in Parkinson’s disease: response to prediction errors is modulated by levels of dopamine. Journal of Neuroscience 32(2):542-50.

Galea J.M, Jayaram G, Ajagbe L & Celnik P. Modulation of cerebellar excitability by polarity-specific non-invasive direct current stimulation. Journal of Neuroscience 29:9115-22

Yes112016: The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a more specialized journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience. For purely behavioral studies, our criteria have evolved to require that a behavioral study provides novel insights into the underlying neural mechanisms. In this case, the editors feel that this study does not provide sufficiently novel or direct insights into neural representations or neural mechanisms to be a good fit for the Journal.
Sadly I have already got to the point where I do not even consider Journal of Neuroscience for a behavioural-only study. This actually creates quite a vacuum between the top-end journals which are happy to review/accept behavioural-only studies (Nature Neuroscience, PNAS, Nature Communications) and lower end journals (Journal of Neurophysiology, PLOS one). Behavioural papers which sit between these journals were generally placed in Journal of Neuroscience (as similar journals such as Cerebral Cortex already have a no behavioural-only paper policy). However, now there is basically no home for this level of behavioural paper which is both highly frustrating and pretty depressing.
95
10/16/2017 9:00:49Yes33McDougle S.D., Bond K.M., & Taylor J.A. (2015). Explicit and implicit processes constitute the fast and slow processes of sensorimotor learning. The Journal of Neuroscience, 35(26):9568-9579.

Taylor J.A., Krakauer J.W., & Ivry R.B. (2014). Explicit and implicit contributions to learning in a sensorimotor adaptation task. The Journal of Neuroscience, 34(8): 3023-3032.

Thoroughman K.A. & Taylor J.A. (2005). Rapid reshaping of human motor generalization. The Journal of Neuroscience, 25(39):8948-895.
Yes22We have recently moved to using editorial review as a first screen of submitted papers in order to get a more rapid response to authors on papers that we believe will not meet our editorial criteria or the scope of the Journal.

Although the Reviewing Editors noted the care with which the work had been conducted they expressed concern about the degree to which the findings could be linked to neural mechanisms which are the key focus for The Journal of Neuroscience. I am very sorry but the overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a journal more specifically focused on motor behavior than for the The Journal of Neuroscience.

Both were the same form letter and were in 2015.
Thanks for organizing this!
96
10/16/2017 9:06:50Yes100My papers either include behavior+neuronal correlates+manipulating neuronal activity, behavior+manipulating neuronal activity, or measurement of neuronal activity+pharmacologyNoFor both the accepted and rejected papers I submitted to JN the editorial process and the reviews were excellent
97
10/16/2017 10:20:48NoNo
98
10/16/2017 12:55:39Yes11Shaikh et al. Keeping your head on target. J Neurosci. 33: 11281-11295, 2013. PMID: 23825431n/aYes22The overall consensus was that your paper may be more appropriate for a more specialized journal than for the broad readership of The Journal of Neuroscience. Because we have to reject a large majority of the papers that we receive, we often make prompt editorial decisions when we think that The Journal is really not the right place for a particular paper. In this case, the editors feel that this study does not provide sufficient insights into neural mechanisms or neural models to be a good fit for the Journal, even though the behavioral experiments may be of high quality.I feel that this push back against behavioral research is a broader trend affecting neuroscience journals in general, although the recent position of the Journal of Neuroscience certainly highlights this problem. It is a dangerous belief that behavior alone can offer no insights into neuroscience; a large body of behavioral work is necessary to be able to interpret any neural data, let alone justify the cost of such work by enabling the construction of solid hypotheses to be tested.
99
10/16/2017 13:15:59Yes10Mauk, M. D. & Ruiz, B. P. The learning-dependent timing of Pavlovian eyelid responses: Differential conditioning using multiple inter-stimulus intervals. Behavioral Neuroscience, 106: 666-681, 1992.
Cerebellar cortex lesions prevent acquisition of conditioned eyelid responses. Journal of Neuroscience, 19:10940-10947, 1999.
Latent learning of timed responses in the cerebellar cortex Journal of Neuroscience, 21:682-690, 2001.
Kreider, J. C. & Mauk, M. D. Eyelid conditioning to a target amplitude. Journal of Neuroscience, 30(42):14145-14152, 2010.
A decrementing form of plasticity apparent in cerebellar learning. Journal of Neuroscience, 30(50):16993-17003, 2010.
A subtraction mechanism of temporal coding in cerebellum. Journal of Neuroscience, 31(6):2025–2034, 2011.
Cerebellar cortex lesions disrupt the learning-dependent timing of conditioned eyelid responses. Journal of Neuroscience, 13(4):1708-1718, 1993.
Timing mechanisms in the cerebellum: Testing predictions of a large scale computer simulation. Journal of Neuroscience, 20: 5516-5525, 2000.
A mechanism for savings in the cerebellum. Journal of Neuroscience, 21:4081-4089, 2001.
Learning-induced plasticity in cerebellar nucleus. Journal of Neuroscience, 26(49): 12656-12663, 2006.
Persistent activity in prefrontal cortex during trace eyelid conditioning: Dissociating responses that reflect cerebellar output from those that do not. Journal of Neuroscience, 33(38): 15272-15284, 2013.
Halverson, H. E., Khilkevich, A. & Mauk, M. D. Relating Purkinje cell activity to the timing and amplitude of conditioned eyelid responses. Journal of Neuroscience, 35(20):7813-7832 (2015).
No
100
10/16/2017 16:04:14NoNo
Loading...
 
 
 
Form Responses 1