World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
32
Citations
5411
World Ranking
10812
National Ranking
1053

Hanna Zagefka 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 Hanna Zagefka 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: 87 publications — 12th percentile

12% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Hanna Zagefka 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 Hanna Zagefka 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: 32 D-Index — 6th percentile

6% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

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

  • The relationship between acculturation strategies, relative fit and intergroup relations: immigrant-majority relations in Germany

    Hanna Zagefka;Rupert Brown

  • Nuestra Culpa : Collective Guilt and Shame as Predictors of Reparation for Historical Wrongdoing

    Rupert Brown;Roberto Gonzalez;Hanna Zagefka;Jorge Manzi

  • When does national identification lead to the rejection of immigrants? Cross-sectional and longitudinal evidence for the role of essentialist in-group definitions

    Samuel Pehrson;Rupert Brown;Hanna Zagefka

  • The Dynamics of Acculturation: An Intergroup Perspective

    Rupert Brown;Hanna Zagefka

  • Donating to disaster victims: Responses to natural and humanly caused events

    Hanna Zagefka;Masi Noor;Rupert Brown;Georgina Randsley de Moura

  • Predictors and consequences of negative attitudes toward immigrants in Belgium and Turkey: The role of acculturation preferences and economic competition

    Hanna Zagefka;Rupert Brown;Murielle Broquard;Sibel Leventoglu Martin

  • The Psychology of Charitable Donations to Disaster Victims and Beyond

    Hanna Zagefka;Trevor James

  • Comparisons and Perceived Deprivation in Ethnic Minority Settings

    Hanna Zagefka;Rupert Brown

  • Is support for multiculturalism threatened by … threat itself?

    Linda K. Tip;Hanna Zagefka;Roberto González;Rupert Brown

  • The identity dynamics of acculturation and multiculturalism: situating acculturation in context

    S J Schwartz;Vignoles;R Brown;H Zagefka

  • The concept of ethnicity in social psychological research: Definitional issues

    Hanna Zagefka

  • Explaining majority members’ acculturation preferences for minority members: A mediation model

    Lucía López-Rodríguez;Hanna Zagefka;Marisol Navas;Isabel Cuadrado

  • We all live in Germany but ... Ingroup projection, group-based emotions and prejudice against immigrants

    Thomas Kessler;Amelie Mummendey;Friedrich Funke;Rupert Brown

  • Ingroup Affiliations and Prejudice

    Rupert Brown;Hanna Zagefka

  • Predictors of majority members' acculturation preferences: Experimental evidence

    Hanna Zagefka;Linda K. Tip;Roberto González;Rupert Brown

  • Downplaying a compromised social image: The effect of metastereotype valence on social identification

    Chuma K. Owuamalam;Hanna Zagefka

  • On the Psychological Barriers to the Workplace: When and Why Metastereotyping Undermines Employability Beliefs of Women and Ethnic Minorities

    Chuma Kevin Owuamalam;Hanna Zagefka

  • How minority members' perceptions of majority members' acculturation preferences shape minority members' own acculturation preferences: evidence from Chile.

    Hanna Zagefka;Roberto González;Rupert Brown

  • Antecedents and consequences of acculturation preferences of non‐indigenous Chileans in relation to an indigenous minority: longitudinal survey evidence

    Hanna Zagefka;Rupert Brown;Roberto González

Frequent Co-Authors

Rupert Brown
Rupert Brown University of Sussex
Roberto González
Roberto González Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Amélie Mummendey
Amélie Mummendey Friedrich Schiller University Jena
Thomas Kessler
Thomas Kessler Friedrich Schiller University Jena
Jacques-Philippe Leyens
Jacques-Philippe Leyens Université Catholique de Louvain
Seth J. Schwartz
Seth J. Schwartz The University of Texas at Austin
Ulrich Wagner
Ulrich Wagner Philipp University of Marburg
Mark Tarrant
Mark Tarrant University of Exeter
John Drury
John Drury University of Sussex
Brian Lickel
Brian Lickel University of Massachusetts Amherst

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:

Best Scientists Citing Hanna Zagefka

Recently Published Articles