We provide a quantitative analysis of the philosophy-neuroscience nexus using citation analysis. Combining bibliometric indicators of cross-field visibility with journal citation mapping techniques, we investigate four dimensions of the nexus: how the visibility of neuroscience in philosophy and of philosophy in neuroscience has changed over time, which areas of philosophy are more interested in neuroscience, which areas of neuroscience are more interested in philosophy, and how the trading zone between the two fields is configured. We also discuss two hypotheses: the supposed occurrence of a neuro-revolution in philosophy and the role of psychology as the disciplinary link between neuroscience and philosophy. Both the visibility of neuroscience in philosophy and the visibility of philosophy in neuroscience have increased significantly from 1980 to 2020, albeit the latter remains an order of magnitude lower than the former. Neuroscience is particularly visible in philosophy of mind, applied ethics, philosophy of science, but not in ‘core’ areas of analytic philosophy. Philosophy is particularly visible in cognitive and systems neuroscience and neuropsychiatry, but not in biomedical neuroscience. As for the trading zone between philosophy and neuroscience, our data show that it works differently in philosophy and in neuroscience. While some philosophy journals are active loci of bidirectional communication, neuroscience journals are divided between journals ‘importing’ philosophy in neuroscience and journals ‘exporting’ neuroscience to philosophy. Lastly, data do not support the hypothesis that a widespread neuro-revolution has transformed philosophy radically, but support the hypothesis that psychology functions as a mediating disciplinary link between philosophy and neuroscience.

我们使用引文分析提供哲学-神经科学联系的定量分析。将跨领域可见性的文献计量指标与期刊引文映射技术相结合，我们研究了这种关系的四个维度：神经科学在哲学中的可见性和哲学在神经科学中的可见性如何随着时间的推移而变化，哪些哲学领域对神经科学更感兴趣，哪些神经科学领域对哲学更感兴趣，以及两个领域之间的交易区是如何配置的。我们还讨论了两个假设：哲学中神经革命的假设发生以及心理学作为神经科学和哲学之间学科联系的作用。从 1980 年到 2020 年，神经科学在哲学中的能见度和哲学在神经科学中的能见度都显着增加，尽管后者仍比前者低一个数量级。神经科学在心灵哲学、应用伦理学、科学哲学中尤为明显，但在分析哲学的“核心”领域中并不明显。哲学在认知和系统神经科学以及神经精神病学中尤为明显，但在生物医学神经科学中则不然。至于哲学和神经科学之间的交易区，我们的数据显示，它在哲学和神经科学中的运作方式不同。虽然一些哲学期刊是双向交流的活跃场所，但神经科学期刊分为“输入”神经科学哲学的期刊和“输出”神经科学到哲学的期刊。 最后，数据并不支持广泛的神经革命从根本上改变了哲学的假设，但支持心理学作为哲学和神经科学之间的中介学科联系的假设。