World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
58
Citations
17050
World Ranking
3818
National Ranking
2141

Kurt Gray 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 Kurt Gray 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: 143 publications — 45th percentile

45% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Kurt Gray 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 Kurt Gray 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: 58 D-Index — 67th percentile

67% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Kurt Gray is affiliated with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in the United States. Their research spans social sciences and psychology, with particular attention to sociology and political science, social psychology, cognitive neuroscience, artificial intelligence, and safety research.

The scientist's work focuses extensively on the psychology of moral and emotional judgment, social and intergroup psychology, cultural differences and values, death anxiety and social exclusion, emotions and moral behavior, AI in service interactions, and the ethics and social impacts of AI.

Their recent published papers include the following:

  • "Addressing climate change with behavioral science: A global intervention tournament in 63 countries," 2024, Science Advances
  • "Can AI language models replace human participants?," 2023, Trends in Cognitive Sciences
  • "The rise of robots increases job insecurity and maladaptive workplace behaviors: Multimethod evidence," 2022, Journal of Applied Psychology
  • "Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts," 2021, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
  • "Robots at work: People prefer-and forgive-service robots with perceived feelings," 2020, Journal of Applied Psychology

Kurt Gray frequently collaborates with several co-authors, including Yochanan Bigman, Joshua Conrad Jackson, Frank Kachanoff, Curtis Puryear, and Kai Chi Yam.

Their research has been published in various venues, with the highest number of publications appearing in UNC Libraries. Other frequent publication venues include the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Academy of Management Proceedings, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, and Journal of Experimental Psychology General.

Best Publications

  • Dimensions of mind perception

    Heather M. Gray;Kurt Gray;Daniel M. Wegner

  • Mind Perception Is the Essence of Morality

    Kurt James Gray;Liane Young;Adam Waytz

  • Feeling Robots and Human Zombies: Mind Perception and the Uncanny Valley.

    Kurt Gray;Daniel M. Wegner

  • Causes and consequences of mind perception

    Adam Waytz;Kurt James Gray;Nicholas Epley;Daniel M. Wegner

  • The Theory of Dyadic Morality: Reinventing Moral Judgment by Redefining Harm:

    Chelsea Schein;Kurt James Gray

  • Moral typecasting: divergent perceptions of moral agents and moral patients.

    Kurt Gray;Daniel M. Wegner

  • People are averse to machines making moral decisions.

    Yochanan E. Bigman;Kurt James Gray

  • The myth of harmless wrongs in moral cognition: Automatic dyadic completion from sin to suffering.

    Kurt James Gray;Chelsea Schein;Adrian F. Ward

  • Blaming God for Our Pain: Human Suffering and the Divine Mind

    Kurt Gray;Daniel M. Wegner

  • Simulating Murder: The Aversion to Harmful Action

    Fiery Cushman;Kurt Gray;Allison Gaffey;Wendy Berry Mendes

  • More than a body: mind perception and the nature of objectification.

    Kurt Gray;Joshua Knobe;Mark Sheskin;Paul Bloom

  • National identity predicts public health support during a global pandemic

    Unknown

  • The Moral Dyad: A Fundamental Template Unifying Moral Judgment.

    Kurt Gray;Adam Waytz;Liane Young

  • The Unifying Moral Dyad Liberals and Conservatives Share the Same Harm-Based Moral Template

    Chelsea Schein;Kurt James Gray

  • Robots at work: People prefer-and forgive-service robots with perceived feelings.

    Kai Chi Yam;Yochanan E Bigman;Pok Man Tang;Remus Ilies

  • Atlas of Moral Psychology

    Kurt Gray;Jesse Graham

  • A Constructionist Review of Morality and Emotions No Evidence for Specific Links Between Moral Content and Discrete Emotions

    C. Daryl Cameron;Kristen Ann Lindquist;Kurt James Gray

  • Distortions of Mind Perception in Psychopathology

    Kurt James Gray;Adrianna C. Jenkins;Andrea S. Heberlein;Daniel M. Wegner

  • Paying It Forward: Generalized Reciprocity and the Limits of Generosity

    Kurt Gray;Adrian Frank Ward;Michael Irwin Norton

  • The Sting of Intentional Pain

    Kurt Gray;Daniel M. Wegner

  • The Structure of Online Activism

    Kevin Lewis;Kurt James Gray;Jens Meierhenrich

Frequent Co-Authors

Dinesh Manocha
Dinesh Manocha University of Maryland, College Park
Daniel M. Wegner
Daniel M. Wegner Harvard University
Michael I. Norton
Michael I. Norton Harvard University
Adam Waytz
Adam Waytz Northwestern University
Stephen Anderson
Stephen Anderson Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Michele J. Gelfand
Michele J. Gelfand Stanford University
Liane Young
Liane Young Boston College
Yoed N. Kenett
Yoed N. Kenett Technion – Israel Institute of Technology
David G. Rand
David G. Rand Cornell University
Brock Bastian
Brock Bastian University of Melbourne

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 opens up diverse and rewarding career paths. For instance, some students pursue sports psychology career paths—helping athletes improve performance and navigate mental health challenges. Others are drawn to organizational environments, making industrial organizational psychology education a valuable choice for roles in human resources, management consulting, or workplace wellness.

Not all therapist careers require a traditional psychology degree. Learn how can you be a therapist without a bachelor's degree in psychology through various educational routes and certifications, expanding your options in fields like counseling, social work, and coaching.

If you’re considering clinical practice, it’s essential to understand the differences between career paths. Comparing a psychologist vs psychiatrist can help clarify which profession aligns better with your interests and goals, as each requires unique training and offers different scopes of practice.

Best Scientists Citing Kurt Gray

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles