World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Adriana A. Zekveld

Adriana A. Zekveld

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
36
Citations
7269
World Ranking
8925
National Ranking
239

Adriana A. Zekveld publication distribution in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Neuroscience in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Adriana A. Zekveld sits on this spectrum.

38–47 publications: 18 scientists 48–57 publications: 79 scientists 58–67 publications: 193 scientists 68–77 publications: 323 scientists 78–87 publications: 406 scientists 88–97 publications: 452 scientists 98–107 publications: 539 scientists 108–117 publications: 505 scientists 118–127 publications: 522 scientists 128–137 publications: 469 scientists 138–147 publications: 456 scientists 148–157 publications: 459 scientists 158–167 publications: 397 scientists 168–177 publications: 383 scientists 178–187 publications: 350 scientists 188–197 publications: 302 scientists 198–207 publications: 306 scientists 208–217 publications: 262 scientists 218–227 publications: 242 scientists 228–237 publications: 220 scientists 238–247 publications: 203 scientists 248–257 publications: 174 scientists 258–267 publications: 176 scientists 268–277 publications: 175 scientists 278–287 publications: 125 scientists 288–297 publications: 116 scientists 298–307 publications: 127 scientists 308–317 publications: 128 scientists 318–327 publications: 99 scientists 328–337 publications: 89 scientists 338–347 publications: 78 scientists 348–357 publications: 96 scientists 358–367 publications: 66 scientists 368–377 publications: 59 scientists 378–387 publications: 65 scientists 388–397 publications: 54 scientists 398–407 publications: 48 scientists 408–417 publications: 49 scientists 418–427 publications: 34 scientists 428–437 publications: 31 scientists 438–447 publications: 30 scientists 448–457 publications: 31 scientists 458–467 publications: 36 scientists 468–477 publications: 40 scientists 478–487 publications: 35 scientists 488–497 publications: 30 scientists 498–507 publications: 23 scientists 508–517 publications: 26 scientists 518–527 publications: 20 scientists 528–537 publications: 23 scientists 538–547 publications: 20 scientists 548–557 publications: 20 scientists 558–567 publications: 17 scientists 568–577 publications: 14 scientists 578–587 publications: 20 scientists 588–597 publications: 20 scientists 598–607 publications: 19 scientists 608–617 publications: 18 scientists 618–627 publications: 17 scientists 628–637 publications: 11 scientists 638–647 publications: 11 scientists 648–657 publications: 11 scientists 658–667 publications: 8 scientists 668–677 publications: 7 scientists 678–687 publications: 11 scientists 688–697 publications: 10 scientists 698–707 publications: 4 scientists 708–717 publications: 6 scientists 718–727 publications: 5 scientists 728–737 publications: 5 scientists 738–747 publications: 9 scientists 748–757 publications: 9 scientists 758–767 publications: 3 scientists 768–777 publications: 7 scientists 778–787 publications: 7 scientists 788–797 publications: 6 scientists 798–807 publications: 2 scientists 808–817 publications: 2 scientists 818–827 publications: 7 scientists 828–837 publications: 0 scientists 838–847 publications: 9 scientists 848–857 publications: 3 scientists 858–867 publications: 1 scientists 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38 publications 887+

This scientist: 111 publications — 23rd percentile

23% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 887 publications or more.

Adriana A. Zekveld D-index placement in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Neuroscience scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Adriana A. Zekveld sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 42 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 172 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 296 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 435 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 459 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 456 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 467 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 478 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 512 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 435 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 425 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 418 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 392 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 357 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 334 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 328 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 260 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 278 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 239 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 250 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 210 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 200 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 189 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 170 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 146 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 113 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 126 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 100 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 84 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 99 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 84 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 85 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 72 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 76 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 45 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 49 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 43 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 32 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 45 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 50 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 32 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 39 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 29 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 27 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 19 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 23 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 27 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 16 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 24 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 13 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 21 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 17 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 14 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 15 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 10 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 10 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 13 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 9 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 8 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 6 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 6 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 7 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 7 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 10 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 4 scientists 162 D-Index: 8 scientists 163+ D-Index: 100 scientists
30 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 36 D-Index — 7th percentile

7% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 163 D-Index or more.

Overview

Adriana A. Zekveld is affiliated with Amsterdam UMC in the Netherlands. Their research primarily focuses on the interdisciplinary fields of neuroscience and health professions, with a notable emphasis on cognitive neuroscience and speech and hearing. The subfields they contribute to include signal processing, sensory systems, and pulmonary and respiratory medicine.

The main topics covered in their work revolve around hearing loss and rehabilitation as well as noise effects and management. They further explore speech and audio processing, hearing physiology including cochlea and tinnitus genetics, neuroscience related to music perception, and methods in phonocardiography and auscultation techniques. Their research also touches on multisensory perception and integration.

Adriana A. Zekveld has authored numerous publications, with frequent appearances in journals such as Ear and Hearing, Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, Hearing Research, Trends in Hearing, and The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

Notable recent papers include:

  • The effect of monetary reward on listening effort and sentence recognition, 2021, Hearing Research
  • Investigating the Influences of Task Demand and Reward on Cardiac Pre-Ejection Period Reactivity During a Speech-in-Noise Task, 2020, Ear and Hearing
  • Effect of Speech-to-Noise Ratio and Luminance on a Range of Current and Potential Pupil Response Measures to Assess Listening Effort, 2021, Trends in Hearing
  • The Presence of Another Individual Influences Listening Effort, But Not Performance, 2021, Ear and Hearing
  • Social observation increases the cardiovascular response of hearing-impaired listeners during a speech reception task, 2021, Hearing Research

The scientist frequently collaborates with other researchers. Their recurrent co-authors include Sophia E. Kramer, Niek J. Versfeld, Hidde Pielage, Thomas Lunner, and Bethany Plain. These collaborations appear to contribute significantly to their body of work within the research community.

Best Publications

  • The Ease of Language Understanding (ELU) model: Theoretical, empirical, and clinical advances

    Jerker Rönnberg;Thomas Lunner;Adriana Zekveld;Adriana Zekveld;Patrik Sörqvist

  • Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: the influence of sentence intelligibility.

    Adriana A. Zekveld;Sophia E. Kramer;Joost M. Festen

  • Cognitive Load During Speech Perception in Noise: The Influence of Age, Hearing Loss, and Cognition on the Pupil Response

    Adriana A. Zekveld;Sophia E. Kramer;Joost M. Festen

  • The Pupil Dilation Response to Auditory Stimuli: Current State of Knowledge:

    Adriana A Zekveld;Adriana A Zekveld;Adriana A Zekveld;Thomas Koelewijn;Sophia E Kramer

  • Cognitive processing load across a wide range of listening conditions: Insights from pupillometry

    Adriana A. Zekveld;Adriana A. Zekveld;Adriana A. Zekveld;Sophia E. Kramer

  • Top–down and bottom–up processes in speech comprehension

    Adriana A. Zekveld;Dirk J. Heslenfeld;Joost M. Festen;Ruurd Schoonhoven

  • Pupil dilation uncovers extra listening effort in the presence of a single-talker masker.

    Thomas Koelewijn;Adriana A Zekveld;Joost M Festen;Sophia E Kramer

  • When cognition kicks in: Working memory and speech understanding in noise

    Jerker Rönnberg;Mary Rudner;Thomas Lunner;Adriana A Zekveld

  • Impact of stimulus-related factors and hearing impairment on listening effort as indicated by pupil dilation

    Barbara Ohlenforst;Adriana A. Zekveld;Thomas Lunner;Dorothea Wendt

  • Effects of Hearing Impairment and Hearing Aid Amplification on Listening Effort: A Systematic Review.

    Barbara Ohlenforst;Adriana A. Zekveld;Elise P. Jansma;Yang Wang

  • The eye as a window to the listening brain: Neural correlates of pupil size as a measure of cognitive listening load

    Adriana A. Zekveld;Dirk J. Heslenfeld;Ingrid S. Johnsrude;Ingrid S. Johnsrude;Ingrid S. Johnsrude;Niek J. Versfeld

  • A home education program for older adults with hearing impairment and their significant others: A randomized trial evaluating short- and long-term effects

    Sophia E Kramer;G Hella M Allessie;Agaath W Dondorp;Adriana A Zekveld

  • How linguistic closure and verbal working memory relate to speech recognition in noise--a review.

    Jana Besser;Thomas Koelewijn;Adriana A. Zekveld;Sophia E. Kramer

  • Auditory and nonauditory factors affecting speech reception in noise by older listeners

    Erwin L. J. George;Adriana A. Zekveld;Sophia E. Kramer;S. Theo Goverts

  • The pupil response reveals increased listening effort when it is difficult to focus attention

    Thomas Koelewijn;Hilde de Kluiver;Barbara G. Shinn-Cunningham;Adriana A. Zekveld

  • Processing Load Induced by Informational Masking Is Related to Linguistic Abilities

    Thomas Koelewijn;Adriana A. Zekveld;Joost M. Festen;Jerker Rönnberg

  • The development of the text reception threshold test: a visual analogue of the speech reception threshold test.

    Adriana A. Zekveld;Erwin L. J. George;Sophia E. Kramer;S. Theo Goverts

  • The effects of working memory capacity and semantic cues on the intelligibility of speech in noise.

    Adriana A. Zekveld;Mary Rudner;Ingrid S. Johnsrude;Jerker Rönnberg

  • Behavioral and fMRI evidence that cognitive ability modulates the effect of semantic context on speech intelligibility

    Adriana A. Zekveld;Adriana A. Zekveld;Adriana A. Zekveld;Mary Rudner;Mary Rudner;Ingrid S. Johnsrude;Ingrid S. Johnsrude;Ingrid S. Johnsrude;Dirk J. Heslenfeld

  • Impact of SNR, masker type and noise reduction processing on sentence recognition performance and listening effort as indicated by the pupil dilation response.

    Barbara Ohlenforst;Dorothea Wendt;Sophia E. Kramer;Graham Naylor

  • Hearing impairment, cognition and speech understanding: exploratory factor analyses of a comprehensive test battery for a group of hearing aid users, the n200 study.

    Jerker Rönnberg;Thomas Lunner;Elaine Hoi Ning Ng;Björn Lidestam

Frequent Co-Authors

Jerker Rönnberg
Jerker Rönnberg Linköping University
Mary Rudner
Mary Rudner Linköping University
Ingrid S. Johnsrude
Ingrid S. Johnsrude University of Western Ontario
Dirk J. Heslenfeld
Dirk J. Heslenfeld Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Patrik Sörqvist
Patrik Sörqvist University of Gaevle
Björn Lyxell
Björn Lyxell Linköping University
Barbara G. Shinn-Cunningham
Barbara G. Shinn-Cunningham Carnegie Mellon University
M. Kathleen Pichora-Fuller
M. Kathleen Pichora-Fuller University of Toronto
Jan Berend Deijen
Jan Berend Deijen Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Jürgen Hänggi
Jürgen Hänggi University of Zurich

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

If you're interested in studying Neuroscience in the USA, there are several related online degree options and career pathways to consider. For those who want a flexible route to clinical practice, check out psyd psychology online programs, which provide doctoral-level training for aspiring psychologists.

Another in-demand field is marriage and family therapy, where online mft programs accredited offer pathways to licensure and professional growth. If you’re looking for a fast-tracked education, 2 year accelerated bachelor degrees make it possible to complete your undergraduate studies more quickly, so you can kickstart your career sooner.

Long-term earning potential is also a key factor. You may want to explore 4 year degrees that pay well to find programs that lead to lucrative opportunities in health, science, or technology. Evaluating these options can help you choose the best educational pathway to align with your career needs in neuroscience and related fields.

Best Scientists Citing Adriana A. Zekveld

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles