World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
44
Citations
10834
World Ranking
6862
National Ranking
324

Amélie Mummendey publication distribution in Psychology in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Psychology in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Amélie Mummendey sits on this spectrum.

31–40 publications: 6 scientists 41–50 publications: 52 scientists 51–60 publications: 138 scientists 61–70 publications: 299 scientists 71–80 publications: 461 scientists 81–90 publications: 605 scientists 91–100 publications: 713 scientists 101–110 publications: 736 scientists 111–120 publications: 686 scientists 121–130 publications: 670 scientists 131–140 publications: 644 scientists 141–150 publications: 597 scientists 151–160 publications: 576 scientists 161–170 publications: 477 scientists 171–180 publications: 450 scientists 181–190 publications: 397 scientists 191–200 publications: 343 scientists 201–210 publications: 328 scientists 211–220 publications: 313 scientists 221–230 publications: 283 scientists 231–240 publications: 226 scientists 241–250 publications: 196 scientists 251–260 publications: 201 scientists 261–270 publications: 171 scientists 271–280 publications: 151 scientists 281–290 publications: 139 scientists 291–300 publications: 113 scientists 301–310 publications: 102 scientists 311–320 publications: 100 scientists 321–330 publications: 76 scientists 331–340 publications: 92 scientists 341–350 publications: 85 scientists 351–360 publications: 69 scientists 361–370 publications: 71 scientists 371–380 publications: 63 scientists 381–390 publications: 58 scientists 391–400 publications: 57 scientists 401–410 publications: 43 scientists 411–420 publications: 33 scientists 421–430 publications: 50 scientists 431–440 publications: 41 scientists 441–450 publications: 32 scientists 451–460 publications: 27 scientists 461–470 publications: 28 scientists 471–480 publications: 25 scientists 481–490 publications: 28 scientists 491–500 publications: 20 scientists 501–510 publications: 23 scientists 511–520 publications: 26 scientists 521–530 publications: 17 scientists 531–540 publications: 21 scientists 541–550 publications: 14 scientists 551–560 publications: 16 scientists 561–570 publications: 10 scientists 571–580 publications: 22 scientists 581–590 publications: 9 scientists 591–600 publications: 14 scientists 601–610 publications: 9 scientists 611–620 publications: 11 scientists 621–630 publications: 4 scientists 631–640 publications: 7 scientists 641–650 publications: 5 scientists 651–660 publications: 10 scientists 661–670 publications: 8 scientists 671–680 publications: 8 scientists 681–690 publications: 4 scientists 691–700 publications: 3 scientists 701–704 publications: 4 scientists 705+ publications: 100 scientists
31 publications 705+

This scientist: 105 publications — 23rd percentile

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

The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more.

Amélie Mummendey D-index placement in Psychology in 2026

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

30–31 D-Index: 398 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 702 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 671 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 659 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 641 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 671 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 617 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 558 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 495 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 487 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 445 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 390 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 408 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 345 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 325 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 321 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 248 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 290 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 218 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 219 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 215 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 183 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 169 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 132 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 137 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 120 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 112 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 86 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 101 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 83 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 77 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 70 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 78 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 58 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 53 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 57 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 48 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 53 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 46 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 24 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 35 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 27 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 31 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 22 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 16 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 24 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 18 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 11 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 19 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 10 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 16 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 10 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 12 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 8 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 5 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 12 scientists 144+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30 D-Index 144+

This scientist: 44 D-Index — 41st percentile

41% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more.

Overview

Amélie Mummendey was affiliated with Friedrich Schiller University Jena in Germany. Throughout their academic career, they contributed to research in various scientific domains.

The scientist did not have publicly listed recent papers, frequent co-authors, or recognized publication venues within the provided data.

There are no recorded book publications or fields of study specifically attributed to this individual in the available information. Similarly, no specialized subfields or principal research topics were documented.

No awards or distinctions were registered during their career, limiting further insights into recognitions received.

Their professional record focuses primarily on the association with Friedrich Schiller University Jena, suggesting that their work was closely linked to this institution during their active years.

Best Publications

  • Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries.

    Jens Binder;Hanna Zagefka;Rupert Brown;Friedrich Funke

  • Social Discrimination and Tolerance in Intergroup Relations: Reactions to Intergroup Difference:

    Amélie Mummendey;Michael Wenzel

  • Strategies to cope with negative social identity: predictions by social identity theory and relative deprivation theory.

    Amélie Mummendey;Thomas Kessler;Andreas Klink;Rosemarie Mielke

  • Nationalism and patriotism: National identification and out‐group rejection

    Amélie Mummendey;Andreas Klink;Rupert Brown

  • Superordinate identities and intergroup conflict: The ingroup projection model

    Michael Wenzel;Amélie Mummendey;Sven Waldzus

  • Vicarious intergroup contact effects: Applying social-cognitive theory to intergroup contact research.

    Agostino Mazziotta;Amélie Mummendey;Stephen C. Wright

  • Positive–Negative Asymmetry in Social Discrimination

    Amélie Mummendey;Sabine Otten

  • Responding to negative social identity: a taxonomy of identity management strategies

    Mathias Blanz;Amélie Mummendey;Rosemarie Mielke;Andreas Klink

  • The Ingroup as Pars Pro Toto: Projection From the Ingroup Onto the Inclusive Category as a Precursor to Social Discrimination:

    Michael Wenzel;Amélie Mummendey;Ulrike Weber;Sven Waldzus

  • Towards tolerance: Representations of superordinate categories and perceived ingroup prototypicality

    Sven Waldzus;Amélie Mummendey;Michael Wenzel;Ulrike Weber

  • Blinded by the accent! The minor role of looks in ethnic categorization.

    Tamara Rakić;Melanie C. Steffens;Amélie Mummendey

  • Categorization is not enough : intergroup discrimination in negative outcome allocation

    Amélie Mummendey;Bernd Simon;Carsten Dietze;Melanie Grünert

  • Socio-structural characteristics of intergroup relations and identity management strategies: Results from a field study in East Germany.

    Amélie Mummendey;Andreas Klink;Rosemarie Mielke;Michael Wenzel

  • Unique individual or interchangeable group member? The accentuation of intragroup differences versus similarities as an indicator of the individual self versus the collective self

    Bernd Simon;Giuseppe Pantaleo;Amélie Mummendey

  • Of bikers, teachers and Germans: groups' diverging views about their prototypicality.

    Sven Waldzus;Amélie Mummendey;Michael Wenzel;Franziska Boettcher

  • Intergroup Discrimination in Positive and Negative Outcome Allocations: Impact of Stimulus Valence, Relative Group Status, and Relative Group Size

    Sabine Otten;Amelie Mummendey;Mathias Blanz

  • ‘Different‘ just means ‘better’: Some obvious and some hidden pathways to in‐group favouritism

    Amélie Mummendey;Hans-Joachim Schreiber

  • Is there any scapegoat around? Determinants of intergroup conflicts at different categorization levels.

    Thomas Kessler;Amélie Mummendey

  • Inclusion in a superordinate category, in-group prototypicality, and attitudes towards out-groups

    Sven Waldzus;Amélie Mummendey

  • When 'different' means 'worse': in-group prototypicality in changing intergroup contexts

    Sven Waldzus;Amélie Mummendey;Michael Wenzel

  • The positive-negative asymmetry of social discrimination

    A Mummendey;Sabine Otten

Frequent Co-Authors

Sabine Otten
Sabine Otten University of Groningen
Thomas Kessler
Thomas Kessler Friedrich Schiller University Jena
Michael Wenzel
Michael Wenzel Flinders University
Rupert Brown
Rupert Brown University of Sussex
Melanie C. Steffens
Melanie C. Steffens Technical University of Kaiserslautern
Hanna Zagefka
Hanna Zagefka Royal Holloway University of London
Jacques-Philippe Leyens
Jacques-Philippe Leyens Université Catholique de Louvain
Thomas W. Schubert
Thomas W. Schubert University of Oslo
Peter Noack
Peter Noack Friedrich Schiller University Jena
Naomi Ellemers
Naomi Ellemers Utrecht University

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

Psychology majors have a wide range of graduate and career options, including related fields such as counseling, social work, and mental health services. Online degrees now offer flexible pathways for those looking to transition into these high-demand professions from anywhere in the country.

For students interested in social work, there are numerous accredited and respected programs to consider. In California, the top social work programs in San Diego provide specialized training and community outreach opportunities. Similarly, in the Pacific Northwest, the best social work degree programs in Tacoma are recognized for their commitment to real-world experience and student support.

If you wish to explore the field nationally, the best social work degrees in USA offer rankings and insights to help you choose the right online or on-campus program for your goals. Those considering study in the Mountain West can find high-quality opportunities among the top social work degrees in Utah, giving access to innovative programs and growing career networks.

By exploring these related online degrees, Psychology graduates can expand their expertise and pursue meaningful careers in helping professions.

Best Scientists Citing Amélie Mummendey

Recently Published Articles