World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Katharina Scheiter

Katharina Scheiter

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Psychology 56 4242 3921 194 191 208 10725
Computer Science 53 4886 4751 220 213 188 9695

Katharina Scheiter publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Katharina Scheiter between 2000 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Katharina Scheiter published across 27 years, from 2000 to 2026, averaging 9.6 papers a year. Output peaked at 30 publications in 2021. 14 of the 259 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2000 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 30. Peak 30 publications in 2021. 2000: 1 publication 2001: 0 publications 2002: 3 publications 2003: 2 publications 2004: 3 publications 2005: 2 publications 2006: 6 publications 2007: 2 publications 2008: 13 publications 2009: 11 publications 2010: 14 publications 2011: 17 publications 2012: 11 publications 2013: 8 publications 2014: 11 publications 2015: 8 publications 2016: 4 publications 2017: 13 publications 2018: 10 publications 2019: 17 publications 2020: 20 publications 2021: 30 publications 2022: 14 publications 2023: 13 publications 2024: 12 publications 2025: 13 publications 2026: 1 publication
2000 2026

259 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Katharina Scheiter: publications per year, 2000 to 2026
Year Publications
2000 1
2001 0
2002 3
2003 2
2004 3
2005 2
2006 6
2007 2
2008 13
2009 11
2010 14
2011 17
2012 11
2013 8
2014 11
2015 8
2016 4
2017 13
2018 10
2019 17
2020 20
2021 30
2022 14
2023 13
2024 12
2025 13
2026 1
Total 259
Download as CSV

Katharina Scheiter 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 Katharina Scheiter sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 69 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 31–40 to 705+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 736. Most scientists, 736, have 101–110 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 201–210 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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
31–40 publications 705+

This scientist: 208 publications — 71st percentile

71% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
31–40 6
41–50 52
51–60 138
61–70 299
71–80 461
81–90 605
91–100 713
101–110 736
111–120 686
121–130 670
131–140 644
141–150 597
151–160 576
161–170 477
171–180 450
181–190 397
191–200 343
201–210 328 208
211–220 313
221–230 283
231–240 226
241–250 196
251–260 201
261–270 171
271–280 151
281–290 139
291–300 113
301–310 102
311–320 100
321–330 76
331–340 92
341–350 85
351–360 69
361–370 71
371–380 63
381–390 58
391–400 57
401–410 43
411–420 33
421–430 50
431–440 41
441–450 32
451–460 27
461–470 28
471–480 25
481–490 28
491–500 20
501–510 23
511–520 26
521–530 17
531–540 21
541–550 14
551–560 16
561–570 10
571–580 22
581–590 9
591–600 14
601–610 9
611–620 11
621–630 4
631–640 7
641–650 5
651–660 10
661–670 8
671–680 8
681–690 4
691–700 3
701–704 4
705+ 100
Download as CSV

Katharina Scheiter 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 Katharina Scheiter sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 58 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 144+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 702. Most scientists, 702, have 32–33 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 56–57 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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
30–31 D-Index 144+

This scientist: 56 D-Index — 64th percentile

64% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 398
32–33 702
34–35 671
36–37 659
38–39 641
40–41 671
42–43 617
44–45 558
46–47 495
48–49 487
50–51 445
52–53 390
54–55 408
56–57 345 56
58–59 325
60–61 321
62–63 248
64–65 290
66–67 218
68–69 219
70–71 215
72–73 183
74–75 169
76–77 132
78–79 137
80–81 120
82–83 112
84–85 86
86–87 101
88–89 83
90–91 77
92–93 70
94–95 78
96–97 58
98–99 53
100–101 57
102–103 48
104–105 53
106–107 46
108–109 24
110–111 35
112–113 27
114–115 32
116–117 31
118–119 22
120–121 16
122–123 24
124–125 18
126–127 11
128–129 19
130–131 10
132–133 16
134–135 10
136–137 12
138–139 8
140–141 5
142–143 12
144+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

Katharina Scheiter is affiliated with the University of Potsdam in Germany. Their research intersects the fields of Psychology and Social Sciences, with a particular focus on Education and Developmental and Educational Psychology. The scientist's work encompasses Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Sociology and Political Science, and Information Systems as subfields of study.

The main subjects of their research include:

  • Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
  • Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
  • Education Methods and Technologies
  • Sociology and Education Studies
  • Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Radiology practices and education

Frequent coauthors collaborating with this scientist include:

  • Andreas Lachner (28 collaborations)
  • Juliane Richter (13 collaborations)
  • Kathleen Stürmer (12 collaborations)
  • Emely Hoch (10 collaborations)
  • Constanze Keutel (10 collaborations)

Their publication venues predominantly encompass journals focusing on education and psychology. Regular outlets for their research consist of:

  • Computers & Education (11 publications)
  • Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft (7 publications)
  • Educational Psychology Review (6 publications)
  • Learning and Instruction (5 publications)
  • PLoS ONE (5 publications)

Representative recent papers authored or co-authored by the scientist include:

  • "Variability of teachers' technology integration in the classroom: A matter of utility!" (2021) published in Computers & Education
  • "Let's talk evidence - The case for combining inquiry-based and direct instruction" (2023) published in Educational Research Review
  • "New technology, new role of parents: How parents' beliefs and behavior affect students' digital media self-efficacy" (2020) published in Computers in Human Behavior
  • "Learning by Drawing Visual Representations: Potential, Purposes, and Practical Implications" (2021) published in Current Directions in Psychological Science
  • "Lernen und Lehren mit digitalen Medien: Eine Standortbestimmung" (2021) published in Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft

Katharina Scheiter has also contributed to book publications, including a title published by Edition ZfE:

  • "Bildung für eine digitale Zukunft" (2023)

Best Publications

  • Explaining the split-attention effect: Is the reduction of extraneous cognitive load accompanied by an increase in germane cognitive load?

    Gabriele Cierniak;Katharina Scheiter;Peter Gerjets

  • Eye tracking as a tool to study and enhance multimedia learning

    Tamara van Gog;Katharina Scheiter

  • In the eyes of the beholder: How experts and novices interpret dynamic stimuli

    Halszka Jarodzka;Katharina Scheiter;Peter Gerjets;Tamara van Gog

  • Learner Control in Hypermedia Environments

    Katharina Scheiter;Peter Gerjets

  • Designing Instructional Examples to Reduce Intrinsic Cognitive Load: Molar versus Modular Presentation of Solution Procedures

    Peter Gerjets;Katharina Scheiter;Richard Catrambone

  • Goal Configurations and Processing Strategies as Moderators Between Instructional Design and Cognitive Load: Evidence From Hypertext-Based Instruction

    Peter Gerjets;Katharina Scheiter

  • Learning to see: Guiding students' attention via a Model's eye movements fosters learning

    Halszka Jarodzka;Tamara van Gog;Michael Dorr;Katharina Scheiter

  • Can learning from molar and modular worked examples be enhanced by providing instructional explanations and prompting self-explanations? *

    Peter Gerjets;Katharina Scheiter;Richard Catrambone

  • Attention guidance during example study via the model's eye movements

    Tamara van Gog;Halszka Jarodzka;Katharina Scheiter;Peter Gerjets

  • Signaling text-picture relations in multimedia learning: A comprehensive meta-analysis

    Juliane Richter;Juliane Richter;Katharina Scheiter;Katharina Scheiter;Alexander Eitel

  • How a picture facilitates the process of learning from text: Evidence for scaffolding

    Alexander Eitel;Katharina Scheiter;Anne Schüler;Marcus Nyström

  • Conveying clinical reasoning based on visual observation via eye-movement modelling examples

    Halszka Jarodzka;Thomas Balslev;Kenneth Holmqvist;Marcus Nyström

  • Studying Visual Displays: How to Instructionally Support Learning

    Alexander Renkl;Katharina Scheiter

  • The effects of realism in learning with dynamic visualizations

    Katharina Scheiter;Peter Gerjets;Thomas Huk;Birgit Imhof

  • Signals foster multimedia learning by supporting integration of highlighted text and diagram elements

    Katharina Scheiter;Alexander Eitel

  • Variability of Teachers’ Technology Integration in the Classroom: A Matter of Utility!

    Iris Backfisch;Iris Backfisch;Andreas Lachner;Andreas Lachner;Kathleen Stürmer;Katharina Scheiter;Katharina Scheiter

  • Learning with hypermedia: The influence of representational formats and different levels of learner control on performance and learning behavior

    Peter Gerjets;Katharina Scheiter;Maria Opfermann;Friedrich W. Hesse

  • The Scientific Value of Cognitive Load Theory: A Research Agenda Based on the Structuralist View of Theories

    Peter Gerjets;Katharina Scheiter;Gabriele Cierniak

  • Information visualizations for knowledge acquisition: The impact of dimensionality and color coding

    Tanja Keller;Peter Gerjets;Katharina Scheiter;Bärbel Garsoffky

Frequent Co-Authors

Peter Gerjets
Peter Gerjets University of Tübingen
Tamara van Gog
Tamara van Gog Utrecht University
Kenneth Holmqvist
Kenneth Holmqvist University of Regensburg
Enkelejda Kasneci
Enkelejda Kasneci Technical University of Munich
Richard Catrambone
Richard Catrambone Georgia Institute of Technology
Friedrich W. Hesse
Friedrich W. Hesse Leibniz Institute for Neurobiology
Fred Paas
Fred Paas Erasmus University Rotterdam
Kai Sassenberg
Kai Sassenberg Leibniz Institute for Neurobiology
Alexander Renkl
Alexander Renkl University of Freiburg
Ronny Scherer
Ronny Scherer University of Oslo

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

Exploring online psychology degrees can open doors to rewarding careers in mental health and family support fields. One of the most popular pathways is becoming a Marriage and Family Therapist (MFT), a role in high demand across the United States. Earning an MFT credential typically requires a specialized graduate degree, supervised clinical experience, and meeting unique state licensure standards.

Certification requirements can vary by location. For example, you can find detailed guides on Baltimore mft certification requirements and mft requirements in Boise. Those planning to work in Massachusetts should review the mft requirements in Boston. Meanwhile, New York aspirants should explore resources on how to become an mft in Buffalo.

When choosing an online program, consider its accreditation, clinical training options, and support for meeting local licensing standards. Online degrees can be flexible and accessible, but always check that your chosen pathway aligns with your state’s requirements before enrolling. This preparation is key to a successful, impactful psychology career.

Best Scientists Citing Katharina Scheiter

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles