World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Galen V. Bodenhausen

Galen V. Bodenhausen

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
78
Citations
32885
World Ranking
1546
National Ranking
923

Galen V. Bodenhausen 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 Galen V. Bodenhausen 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: 168 publications — 58th percentile

58% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Galen V. Bodenhausen 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 Galen V. Bodenhausen 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: 78 D-Index — 87th percentile

87% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Galen V. Bodenhausen is affiliated with Northwestern University in the United States. Their research spans multiple fields within the social sciences and psychology, focusing primarily on social and intergroup psychology, LGBTQ health, identity and policy, psychology of moral and emotional judgment, climate change communication and perception, cultural differences and values, behavioral health and interventions, and racial and ethnic identity research.

Their work is published in a variety of venues, with frequent contributions to:

  • Faculty Opinions - Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
  • Cognition
  • Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
  • Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Bodenhausen's research output includes papers that address topics such as intersectional stereotyping, gender essentialism and the mental representation of transgender individuals, pricing effects on consumer demand, evaluative conditioning, and stereotyping related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Notable recent publications include:

  • "Through the looking glass: A lens-based account of intersectional stereotyping," 2022, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
  • "Gender essentialism and the mental representation of transgender women and men: A multimethod investigation of stereotype content," 2021, Cognition
  • "The boomerang effect of zero pricing: when and why a zero price is less effective than a low price for enhancing consumer demand," 2022, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
  • "Acquiring favorable attitudes based on aversive affective cues: Examining the spontaneity and efficiency of propositional evaluative conditioning," 2021, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
  • "The Pandemic and the "Perpetual Foreigner": How Threats Posed by the COVID-19 Pandemic Relate to Stereotyping of Asian Americans," 2022, Frontiers in Psychology

Bodenhausen frequently collaborates with a select group of co-authors, including Natalie M. Gallagher, Christopher D. Petsko, Xiaomeng Fan, Jordan S. Daley, and Ryan F. Lei. These collaborations are reflected in multiple joint publications.

The scientist's primary fields of study comprise social sciences and psychology, with subfields covering sociology and political science, social psychology, cognitive neuroscience, applied psychology, and management, monitoring, policy, and law. Bodenhausen's research themes traverse socially relevant topics such as stereotyping, identity, moral and emotional judgment, and communication related to climate change.

Best Publications

  • Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change.

    Bertram Gawronski;Galen V. Bodenhausen

  • Social cognition: thinking categorically about others.

    C. Neil Macrae;Galen V. Bodenhausen

  • Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the cognitive toolbox.

    C. Neil Macrae;Alan B. Milne;Galen V. Bodenhausen

  • Out of mind but back in sight: Stereotypes on the rebound

    C. Neil Macrae;Galen V. Bodenhausen;Alan B. Milne;Jolanda Jetten

  • Negative affect and social judgment: The differential impact of anger and sadness

    Galen V Bodenhausen;Lori A. Sheppard;Geoffrey P Kramer

  • Happiness and stereotypic thinking in social judgment.

    Galen V. Bodenhausen;Geoffrey P. Kramer;Karin Süsser

  • Stereotypes as Judgmental Heuristics: Evidence of Circadian Variations in Discrimination

    Galen V. Bodenhausen

  • Social stereotypes and information-processing strategies: The impact of task complexity.

    Galen V. Bodenhausen;Meryl Lichtenstein

  • Stereotypic biases in social decision making and memory: testing process models of stereotype use.

    Galen V. Bodenhausen

  • Facing Prejudice Implicit Prejudice and the Perception of Facial Threat

    Kurt Hugenberg;Galen V. Bodenhausen

  • The dissection of selection in person perception: Inhibitory processes in social stereotyping.

    Neil Macrae;G V Bodenhausen;Alan Berkeley Milne

  • When Positive Stereotypes Threaten Intellectual Performance: The Psychological Hazards of “Model Minority” Status

    Sapna Cheryan;Galen V. Bodenhausen

  • Stereotype activation and inhibition

    Galen V Bodenhausen;C. Neil Macrae

  • The Associative–Propositional Evaluation Model: Theory, Evidence, and Open Questions

    Bertram Gawronski;Galen V. Bodenhausen

  • Perspective taking combats automatic expressions of racial bias.

    Andrew R. Todd;Galen V. Bodenhausen;Jennifer A. Richeson;Adam D. Galinsky

  • Personalized Persuasion Tailoring Persuasive Appeals to Recipients’ Personality Traits

    Jacob B. Hirsh;Sonia K. Kang;Galen V. Bodenhausen

  • Effects of Stereotypes on Decision Making and Information-Processing Strategies

    Galen V. Bodenhausen;Robert S. Wyer

  • Emotions, Arousal, and Stereotypic Judgments: A Heuristic Model of Affect and Stereotyping

    Galen V. Bodenhausen

  • Ambiguity in social categorization: The role of prejudice and facial affect in race categorization.

    Kurt Hugenberg;Galen V. Bodenhausen

  • Social cognition: Categorical person perception.

    C. Neil Macrae;Galen V. Bodenhausen

Frequent Co-Authors

C. Neil Macrae
C. Neil Macrae University of Aberdeen
Bertram Gawronski
Bertram Gawronski The University of Texas at Austin
Kurt Hugenberg
Kurt Hugenberg Indiana University
Patrick W. Corrigan
Patrick W. Corrigan Illinois Institute of Technology
Alan B. Milne
Alan B. Milne University of Aberdeen
Robert S. Wyer
Robert S. Wyer University of Cincinnati
Jennifer A. Richeson
Jennifer A. Richeson Yale University
Adam D. Galinsky
Adam D. Galinsky Columbia University
Thomas Mussweiler
Thomas Mussweiler London Business School
Frank D. Fincham
Frank D. Fincham Florida State 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

Studying psychology in the USA opens the door to a wide range of online degrees and career options. One increasingly popular path is becoming a speech-language pathologist (SLP), a profession that combines psychology, communication sciences, and healthcare. Many psychology graduates find speech-language pathology to be a rewarding career due to its strong job outlook and the opportunity to make a tangible difference in people's lives.

Requirements for SLP careers can vary significantly by state. For example, those interested in slp requirements in Oklahoma will need to meet distinct licensure and education standards. Similarly, becoming a speech therapist in Oregon comes with its own set of guidelines, including supervised clinical practice and national certification.

States such as Pennsylvania and Rhode Island also have unique processes. If you plan to practice in the Northeast, be sure to review Pennsylvania speech pathologist certification requirements, or for the New England area, check the Rhode Island slp certification requirements. Exploring these pathways can help you determine which region and requirements are the best fit for your career goals.

Best Scientists Citing Galen V. Bodenhausen

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles