World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
37
Citations
7875
World Ranking
9083
National Ranking
4817

Deborah Kelemen 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 Deborah Kelemen 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: 62 publications — 2nd percentile

2% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Deborah Kelemen 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 Deborah Kelemen 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: 37 D-Index — 21st percentile

21% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Deborah Kelemen is affiliated with Boston University in the United States and has contributed extensively to the fields of psychology and social sciences. Their research primarily focuses on topics related to animal and plant science education, child and animal learning development, evolution and science education, psychology of moral and emotional judgment, and social and intergroup psychology.

Their work spans several specialized subfields, including social psychology, developmental and educational psychology, sociology and political science, cognitive neuroscience, and the history and philosophy of science.

Deborah Kelemen has published in a range of academic venues, with frequent appearances in Evolution Education and Outreach, Cognition, Journal of Cognition and Development, Topics in Cognitive Science, and the Journal of Environmental Psychology.

Some of their recent papers include:

  • Teaching natural selection in early elementary classrooms: can a storybook intervention reduce teleological misunderstandings? (2020, Evolution Education and Outreach)
  • Inhibiting intuition: Scaffolding children's theory construction about species evolution in the face of competing explanations (2021, Cognition)
  • Are Humans Part of the Natural World? U.S. Children's and Adults' Concept of Nature and its Relationship to Environmental Concern (2023, Topics in Cognitive Science)
  • The moral, or the story? Changing children's distributive justice preferences through social communication (2020, Cognition)
  • Beliefs about Origins and Eternal Life: How Easy Is Formal Religious Theory Development? (2021, Journal of Cognition and Development)

Frequent co-authors include Sarah A. Brown, Samuel Ronfard, Lizette Pizza, Léa Tân Combette, and Natalie Emmons.

Best Publications

  • Are Children “Intuitive Theists”? Reasoning About Purpose and Design in Nature

    Deborah Kelemen

  • The human function compunction: teleological explanation in adults.

    Deborah Kelemen;Evelyn Rosset

  • The scope of teleological thinking in preschool children.

    Deborah Kelemen

  • Professional physical scientists display tenacious teleological tendencies: purpose-based reasoning as a cognitive default.

    Deborah Kelemen;Joshua Rottman;Rebecca Seston

  • Why are rocks pointy? Children's preference for teleological explanations of the natural world.

    Deborah Kelemen

  • Function, goals and intention: children's teleological reasoning about objects

    Deborah Kelemen

  • Intuitions About Origins: Purpose and Intelligent Design in Children's Reasoning About Nature

    Deborah Kelemen;Cara DiYanni

  • Young children's rapid learning about artifacts.

    Krista Casler;Deborah Kelemen

  • Young Children Can Be Taught Basic Natural Selection Using a Picture-Storybook Intervention:

    Deborah Kelemen;Natalie A. Emmons;Rebecca Seston Schillaci;Patricia A. Ganea

  • Inferring Design: Evidence of a Preference for Teleological Explanations in Patients With Alzheimer's Disease

    Tania Lombrozo;Deborah Kelemen;Deborah Zaitchik

  • British and American children's preferences for teleo-functional explanations of the natural world

    Deborah Kelemen

  • The essence of artifacts: Developing the design stance

    Deborah Kelemen;Susan Carey

  • Tainting the soul: Purity concerns predict moral judgments of suicide

    Joshua Rottman;Deborah Kelemen;Liane Young

  • Reasoning about artifacts at 24 months: the developing teleo-functional stance.

    Krista Casler;Deborah Kelemen

  • Question-asking in childhood: A review of the literature and a framework for understanding its development

    Samuel Ronfard;Imac M. Zambrana;Tone K. Hermansen;Deborah Kelemen

  • The divided mind of a disbeliever: Intuitive beliefs about nature as purposefully created among different groups of non-religious adults

    Elisa Järnefelt;Elisa Järnefelt;Caitlin F. Canfield;Deborah Kelemen

  • Syntactic cues in the acquisition of collective nouns

    Paul Bloom;Deborah Kelemen

  • Preschool children’s views on emotion regulation: Functional associations and implications for social-emotional adjustment

    Tracy A. Dennis;Deborah A. Kelemen

  • Using a bad tool with good intention: young children's imitation of adults' questionable choices.

    Cara DiYanni;Deborah Kelemen

  • Developmental Continuity in Teleo-Functional Explanation: Reasoning about Nature Among Romanian Romani Adults

    Krista Casler;Deborah Kelemen

Frequent Co-Authors

Liane Young
Liane Young Boston College
Tania Lombrozo
Tania Lombrozo Princeton University
Susan Carey
Susan Carey Harvard University
Paul Bloom
Paul Bloom Columbia University
Tracy A. Dennis
Tracy A. Dennis Hunter College
Ann L. Brown
Ann L. Brown University of California, Berkeley
Patricia A. Ganea
Patricia A. Ganea University of Toronto
John D. Coley
John D. Coley Northeastern University
Maureen A. Callanan
Maureen A. Callanan University of California, Santa Cruz

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

Pursuing psychology in the USA opens doors to a variety of online degrees and career pathways, particularly within counseling and mental health fields. As online education grows in popularity, students have greater flexibility to choose programs that align with their career goals—from clinical and school counseling to specialized therapeutic services.

When searching for the right fit, it's helpful to compare regional programs. For those interested in studying in Michigan, the top counseling degree programs in Michigan provide both quality curriculum and practical training. Similarly, exploring the best college counseling programs in the Midwest can help you find top-rated schools across multiple states.

Students considering Minnesota should review the Minnesota counseling degree programs for a closer look at local options. Additionally, the Mississippi counseling degree programs highlight southern schools well-suited for those interested in online or in-person degrees.

With the broad range of online and hybrid degrees available, graduates can pursue diverse roles in counseling, therapy, social work, and more—equipping themselves for impactful, people-focused careers.

Best Scientists Citing Deborah Kelemen

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles