World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Jonathan D. Power

Jonathan D. Power

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
42
Citations
36373
World Ranking
7496
National Ranking
3227

Jonathan D. Power publication distribution in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Neuroscience in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Jonathan D. Power sits on this spectrum.

38–47 publications: 18 scientists 48–57 publications: 79 scientists 58–67 publications: 193 scientists 68–77 publications: 323 scientists 78–87 publications: 406 scientists 88–97 publications: 452 scientists 98–107 publications: 539 scientists 108–117 publications: 505 scientists 118–127 publications: 522 scientists 128–137 publications: 469 scientists 138–147 publications: 456 scientists 148–157 publications: 459 scientists 158–167 publications: 397 scientists 168–177 publications: 383 scientists 178–187 publications: 350 scientists 188–197 publications: 302 scientists 198–207 publications: 306 scientists 208–217 publications: 262 scientists 218–227 publications: 242 scientists 228–237 publications: 220 scientists 238–247 publications: 203 scientists 248–257 publications: 174 scientists 258–267 publications: 176 scientists 268–277 publications: 175 scientists 278–287 publications: 125 scientists 288–297 publications: 116 scientists 298–307 publications: 127 scientists 308–317 publications: 128 scientists 318–327 publications: 99 scientists 328–337 publications: 89 scientists 338–347 publications: 78 scientists 348–357 publications: 96 scientists 358–367 publications: 66 scientists 368–377 publications: 59 scientists 378–387 publications: 65 scientists 388–397 publications: 54 scientists 398–407 publications: 48 scientists 408–417 publications: 49 scientists 418–427 publications: 34 scientists 428–437 publications: 31 scientists 438–447 publications: 30 scientists 448–457 publications: 31 scientists 458–467 publications: 36 scientists 468–477 publications: 40 scientists 478–487 publications: 35 scientists 488–497 publications: 30 scientists 498–507 publications: 23 scientists 508–517 publications: 26 scientists 518–527 publications: 20 scientists 528–537 publications: 23 scientists 538–547 publications: 20 scientists 548–557 publications: 20 scientists 558–567 publications: 17 scientists 568–577 publications: 14 scientists 578–587 publications: 20 scientists 588–597 publications: 20 scientists 598–607 publications: 19 scientists 608–617 publications: 18 scientists 618–627 publications: 17 scientists 628–637 publications: 11 scientists 638–647 publications: 11 scientists 648–657 publications: 11 scientists 658–667 publications: 8 scientists 668–677 publications: 7 scientists 678–687 publications: 11 scientists 688–697 publications: 10 scientists 698–707 publications: 4 scientists 708–717 publications: 6 scientists 718–727 publications: 5 scientists 728–737 publications: 5 scientists 738–747 publications: 9 scientists 748–757 publications: 9 scientists 758–767 publications: 3 scientists 768–777 publications: 7 scientists 778–787 publications: 7 scientists 788–797 publications: 6 scientists 798–807 publications: 2 scientists 808–817 publications: 2 scientists 818–827 publications: 7 scientists 828–837 publications: 0 scientists 838–847 publications: 9 scientists 848–857 publications: 3 scientists 858–867 publications: 1 scientists 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38 publications 887+

This scientist: 60 publications — 1st percentile

1% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 887 publications or more.

Jonathan D. Power D-index placement in Neuroscience in 2026

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

30–31 D-Index: 42 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 172 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 296 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 435 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 459 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 456 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 467 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 478 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 512 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 435 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 425 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 418 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 392 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 357 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 334 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 328 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 260 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 278 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 239 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 250 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 210 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 200 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 189 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 170 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 146 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 113 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 126 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 100 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 84 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 99 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 84 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 85 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 72 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 76 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 45 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 49 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 43 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 32 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 45 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 50 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 32 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 39 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 29 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 27 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 19 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 23 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 27 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 16 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 24 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 13 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 21 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 17 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 14 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 15 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 10 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 10 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 13 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 9 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 8 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 6 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 6 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 7 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 7 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 10 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 4 scientists 162 D-Index: 8 scientists 163+ D-Index: 100 scientists
30 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 42 D-Index — 22nd percentile

22% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 163 D-Index or more.

Best Publications

  • Spurious but systematic correlations in functional connectivity MRI networks arise from subject motion

    Jonathan D. Power;Kelly Anne Barnes;Abraham Z. Snyder;Bradley L. Schlaggar

  • Functional network organization of the human brain

    Jonathan D. Power;Alexander L. Cohen;Steven M. Nelson;Gagan S. Wig

  • Methods to detect, characterize, and remove motion artifact in resting state fMRI

    Jonathan D. Power;Anish Mitra;Timothy O. Laumann;Abraham Z. Snyder

  • Prediction of Individual Brain Maturity Using fMRI

    Nico U.F. Dosenbach;Binyam Nardos;Alexander L. Cohen;Damien A. Fair

  • Functional brain networks develop from a "local to distributed" organization

    Damien A. Fair;Alexander L. Cohen;Jonathan D. Power;Nico U. F. Dosenbach

  • Multi-task connectivity reveals flexible hubs for adaptive task control

    Michael W Cole;Jeremy R Reynolds;Jonathan D Power;Grega Repovs

  • Intrinsic and Task-Evoked Network Architectures of the Human Brain

    Michael W. Cole;Michael W. Cole;Danielle S. Bassett;Jonathan D. Power;Todd S. Braver

  • Resting-state fMRI in the Human Connectome Project

    S M Smith;C F Beckmann;J Andersson;E J Auerbach

  • Benchmarking of participant-level confound regression strategies for the control of motion artifact in studies of functional connectivity.

    Rastko Ciric;Daniel H. Wolf;Jonathan D. Power;David R. Roalf

  • Recent progress and outstanding issues in motion correction in resting state fMRI.

    Jonathan D. Power;Bradley L. Schlaggar;Steven E. Petersen

  • Evidence for hubs in human functional brain networks.

    Jonathan D. Power;Bradley L. Schlaggar;Christina N. Lessov-Schlaggar;Steven E. Petersen

  • The development of Human Functional Brain Networks

    Jonathan D. Power;Damien A. Fair;Bradley L. Schlaggar;Steven E. Petersen

  • Sources and implications of whole-brain fMRI signals in humans.

    Jonathan D. Power;Mark Plitt;Timothy O. Laumann;Alex Martin

  • Statistical Improvements in Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Analyses Produced by Censoring High-Motion Data Points

    Joshua S. Siegel;Jonathan D. Power;Joseph W. Dubis;Alecia C. Vogel

  • A somato-cognitive action network alternates with effector regions in motor cortex

    Unknown

  • A Parcellation Scheme for Human Left Lateral Parietal Cortex

    Steven M. Nelson;Alexander L. Cohen;Jonathan D. Power;Gagan S. Wig

  • Control-related systems in the human brain.

    Jonathan D Power;Steven E Petersen

  • Steps toward optimizing motion artifact removal in functional connectivity MRI; a reply to Carp.

    Jonathan D. Power;Kelly Anne Barnes;Abraham Z. Snyder;Bradley L. Schlaggar

  • Ridding fMRI data of motion-related influences: Removal of signals with distinct spatial and physical bases in multiecho data.

    Jonathan D Power;Mark Plitt;Stephen J Gotts;Prantik Kundu

  • Studying Brain Organization via Spontaneous fMRI Signal

    Jonathan D. Power;Bradley L. Schlaggar;Steven E. Petersen

  • Network measures predict neuropsychological outcome after brain injury

    David E. Warren;Jonathan D. Power;Joel Bruss;Natalie L. Denburg

Frequent Co-Authors

Steven E. Petersen
Steven E. Petersen Washington University in St. Louis
Bradley L. Schlaggar
Bradley L. Schlaggar Kennedy Krieger Institute
Timothy O. Laumann
Timothy O. Laumann Washington University in St. Louis
Alex Martin
Alex Martin National Institutes of Health
Abraham Z. Snyder
Abraham Z. Snyder Washington University in St. Louis
Steven M. Nelson
Steven M. Nelson Louis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center
Francis M. Miezin
Francis M. Miezin Washington University in St. Louis
Nico U.F. Dosenbach
Nico U.F. Dosenbach Washington University in St. Louis
Danielle S. Bassett
Danielle S. Bassett University of Pennsylvania
Deanna M. Barch
Deanna M. Barch Washington University in St. Louis

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 neuroscience in the USA opens doors to a diverse array of careers and specialized graduate programs. Many students consider related online degrees to expand their skill set and boost career options in behavioral health, research, and clinical practice.

For those interested in family dynamics and therapy, online mft programs offer flexible pathways toward becoming licensed marriage and family therapists. If you’re drawn to broader aspects of human behavior, exploring masters programs in psychology can help prepare you for roles in research, counseling, or academia.

For undergraduate students, the cheapest online bachelor's degree in psychology options make earning a foundational degree more accessible and affordable. Graduates often find entry-level positions in healthcare or case management. Alternatively, pursuing masters in social work online can lead to rewarding careers in clinical social work, policy, and support services.

Exploring these related online degrees can broaden your expertise, align with your interests in neuroscience, and set you on a fulfilling professional path.

Best Scientists Citing Jonathan D. Power

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles