World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Benjamin Schüz

Benjamin Schüz

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
50
Citations
9600
World Ranking
5453
National Ranking
254

Benjamin Schüz 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 Benjamin Schüz 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: 154 publications — 51st percentile

51% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Benjamin Schüz 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 Benjamin Schüz 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: 50 D-Index — 54th percentile

54% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Benjamin Schüz is affiliated with the University of Bremen in Germany. Their research primarily spans the fields of Psychology and Health Professions, with a substantial focus on the subfields of General Health Professions, Applied Psychology, Clinical Psychology, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, as well as Sociology and Political Science.

The scientist's work covers a range of main topics including:

  • Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health and Medical Studies
  • Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Misinformation and Its Impacts

Benjamin Schüz has contributed to multiple recent papers such as:

  • Equity Effects of Dietary Nudging Field Experiments: Systematic Review (2021) published in Frontiers in Public Health
  • The digital rainbow: Digital determinants of health inequities (2022) published in Digital Health
  • Digital Public Health - ein Überblick (2020) published in Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz
  • The neighborhood socioeconomic inequalities in urban parks in a High-density City: An environmental justice perspective (2021) published in Landscape and Urban Planning
  • Socioeconomic differences in animal food consumption: Education rather than income makes a difference (2022) published in Frontiers in Nutrition

Frequent co-authors include:

  • Hajo Zeeb
  • Jonathan Kolschen
  • Christopher Martin Jones
  • Núria Pedrós Barnils
  • Tilman Brand

Benjamin Schüz has published frequently in venues such as:

  • Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz
  • European Journal of Public Health
  • Das Gesundheitswesen
  • Frontiers in Public Health
  • BMC Public Health

Best Publications

  • Action planning and coping planning for long-term lifestyle change: Theory and assessment

    Falko F. Sniehotta;Ralf Schwarzer;Urte Scholz;Benjamin Schüz

  • Adoption and maintenance of four health behaviors: Theory-guided longitudinal studies on dental flossing, seat belt use, dietary behavior, and physical activity

    Ralf Schwarzer;Benjamin Schüz;Jochen P. Ziegelmann;Sonia Lippke

  • I believe, therefore I achieve (and vice versa): A meta-analytic cross-lagged panel analysis of self-efficacy and academic performance

    Kate Talsma;Benjamin Schüz;Benjamin Schüz;Ralf Schwarzer;Ralf Schwarzer;Kimberley Norris

  • Benefits of Having Friends in Older Ages: Differential Effects of Informal Social Activities on Well-Being in Middle-Aged and Older Adults

    Oliver Huxhold;Martina Miche;Benjamin Schüz

  • How do negative self-perceptions of aging become a self-fulfilling prophecy?

    Susanne Wurm;Lisa M. Warner;Jochen P. Ziegelmann;Julia K. Wolff

  • Beyond behavioural intentions: planning mediates between intentions and physical activity.

    Urte Scholz;Benjamin Schüz;Jochen P. Ziegelmann;Sonia Lippke

  • PREDICTING BINGE-DRINKING BEHAVIOUR USING AN EXTENDED TPB: EXAMINING THE IMPACT OF ANTICIPATED REGRET AND DESCRIPTIVE NORMS

    Richard Cooke;Falko Sniehotta;Benjamin Schüz

  • Gesundheit und Krankheit im Alter

    Karin Böhm;Silke Mardorf;Manuela Nöthen;Torsten Schelhase

  • Disentangling the relation between intentions, planning, and behaviour: A moderated mediation analysis

    Amelie U. Wiedemann;Benjamin Schüz;Falco Sniehotta;Urte Scholz

  • Illness representations, coping, and illness outcomes in people with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Emma M. Richardson;Natalie Schüz;Kristy Sanderson;Jennifer L. Scott

  • Adherence to a daily flossing regimen in university students : effects of planning when, where, how and what to do in the face of barriers

    Benjamin Schüz;Falko F. Sniehotta;Amelie Wiedemann;Rainer Seemann

  • Medication beliefs predict medication adherence in older adults with multiple illnesses

    Benjamin Schüz;Christopher Marx;Susanne Wurm;Lisa M. Warner

  • Subjective Well-Being and Mortality revisited: Differential Effects of Cognitive and Emotional Facets of Well-Being on Mortality

    Maja Wiest;Benjamin Schüz;Noah Webster;Susanne Wurm

  • Sources of self-efficacy for physical activity.

    Lisa M. Warner;Benjamin Schüz;Julia K. Wolff;Linda Parschau

  • The role of physical activity in the relationship between self-perceptions of ageing and self-rated health in older adults.

    Ann-Kristin Beyer;Julia K Wolff;Lisa M Warner;Benjamin Schüz

  • On the assessment and analysis of variables in the health action process approach conducting an investigation

    Ralf Schwarzer;Falco F. Sniehotta;Sonia Lippke;Aleksandra Luszczynska

  • Predicting transitions from preintentional, intentional and actional stages of change

    Benjamin Schuz;Falko F. Sniehotta;Natalie Mallach;Amelie U. Wiedemann

  • Stage-specific effects of an action control intervention on dental flossing

    Benjamin Schüz;Falko F. Sniehotta;Ralf Schwarzer

  • Maintaining autonomy despite multimorbidity: self-efficacy and the two faces of social support

    Lisa M. Warner;Jochen P. Ziegelmann;Benjamin Schüz;Susanne Wurm

  • Changes in Intentions, Planning, and Self-efficacy Predict Changes in Behaviors An Application of Latent True Change Modeling

    Tabea Reuter;Jochen Philipp Ziegelmann;Amelie U. Wiedemann;Christian Geiser

  • Testing Stage-Specific Effects of a Stage-Matched Intervention: A Randomized Controlled Trial Targeting Physical Exercise and Its Predictors

    Sonia Lippke;Ralf Schwarzer;Jochen P. Ziegelmann;Urte Scholz

  • Socioeconomic status as a moderator between social cognitions and physical activity: Systematic review and meta-analysis based on the Theory of Planned Behavior

    Benjamin Schüz;Arthur Sone-Wai Li;Alison Hardinge;Rosemary R.C. McEachan

Frequent Co-Authors

Ralf Schwarzer
Ralf Schwarzer Freie Universität Berlin
Jochen P. Ziegelmann
Jochen P. Ziegelmann Freie Universität Berlin
Lisa M. Warner
Lisa M. Warner Boston College
Urte Scholz
Urte Scholz University of Zurich
Falko F. Sniehotta
Falko F. Sniehotta Newcastle University
Sonia Lippke
Sonia Lippke Jacobs University
Peter R. Harris
Peter R. Harris University of Sussex
Kristy Sanderson
Kristy Sanderson University of East Anglia
Hajo Zeeb
Hajo Zeeb Leibniz Association
Michael Eid
Michael Eid Freie Universität Berlin

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 students often explore fields closely related to human behavior and mental health. Social work is one of the most popular and rewarding career pathways for those interested in making a positive difference in the lives of individuals, families, and communities. Many universities now offer flexible, online social work degree programs, making it possible to balance studies with other responsibilities.

Affordability is a key concern for many students. If you're interested in pursuing an online social work degree, it’s helpful to compare cost-effective options in different states. For example, you can discover the most affordable online social work degree programs in Ohio, or explore offerings in other regions, such as the most affordable online social work degree programs in Tennessee.

Likewise, you can look into the cheapest social work degrees in Arkansas or the cheapest social work programs in Atlanta. These resources help future professionals find programs that fit their budget and career goals. Whether you’re planning to become a counselor, case manager, or pursue another psychology-related role, exploring affordable online pathways is an important first step.

Best Scientists Citing Benjamin Schüz

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles