World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
38
Citations
7603
World Ranking
8778
National Ranking
4672

Lowell Gaertner 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 Lowell Gaertner 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: 84 publications — 10th percentile

10% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Lowell Gaertner 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 Lowell Gaertner 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: 38 D-Index — 24th percentile

24% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Lowell Gaertner is affiliated with the University of Tennessee at Knoxville in the United States. Their research primarily spans the fields of psychology and social sciences, with a notable emphasis on social and intergroup psychology and the psychology of moral and emotional judgment. Additional focus areas include cultural differences and values, neural and behavioral psychology studies, terrorism and political violence, face recognition and perception, as well as evolutionary psychology and human behavior.

Gaertner's work has been published in several academic venues, including multiple contributions to the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology and Affective Science. Other frequent publication venues include Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Nature Human Behaviour, and Social Cognition.

The scientist has collaborated frequently with peers such as David S. March, Michael A. Olson, Jolanda Jetten, Michael J. A. Wohl, and Inga Jasinskaja-Lahti. These collaborations have contributed to the depth and scope of Gaertner's research output.

Significant recent publications by Lowell Gaertner include:

  • A multi-lab test of the facial feedback hypothesis by the Many Smiles Collaboration, 2022, Nature Human Behaviour
  • Fact or artifact? Demand characteristics and participants' beliefs can moderate, but do not fully account for, the effects of facial feedback on emotional experience., 2022, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
  • Danger or dislike: Distinguishing threat from negative valence as sources of automatic anti-Black bias., 2021, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
  • On the Automatic Nature of Threat: Physiological and Evaluative Reactions to Survival-Threats Outside Conscious Perception, 2022, Affective Science
  • Lions, and Tigers, and Implicit Measures, Oh My! Implicit Assessment and the Valence vs. Threat Distinction, 2020, Social Cognition

Best Publications

  • Pancultural self-enhancement.

    Constantine Sedikides;Lowell Gaertner;Yoshiyasu Toguchi

  • Pancultural self-enhancement reloaded: a meta-analytic reply to Heine (2005).

    Constantine Sedikides;Lowell Gaertner;Jack L. Vevea

  • Intergroup discrimination in the minimal group paradigm: categorization, reciprocation, or fear?

    Lowell Gaertner;Chester A. Insko

  • Perceived ingroup entitativity and intergroup bias: an interconnection of self and others

    Lowell Gaertner;John Schopler

  • In search of self-definition: motivational primacy of the individual self, motivational primacy of the collective self, or contextual primacy?

    Lowell Gaertner;Constantine Sedikides;Kenneth Graetz

  • Tactical Self-Enhancement in China: Is Modesty at the Service of Self-Enhancement in East Asian Culture?

    Huajian Cai;Constantine Sedikides;Lowell Gaertner;Chenjun Wang

  • The "I," the "We," and the "When": a meta-analysis of motivational primacy in self-definition

    Lowell Gaertner;Constantine Sedikides;Jack L. Vevea;Jonathan Iuzzini

  • Self-esteem and favoritism toward novel in-groups: the self as an evaluative base.

    Richard H. Gramzow;Lowell Gaertner

  • A Three-Tier Hierarchy of Self-Potency: Individual Self, Relational Self, Collective Self

    Constantine Sedikides;Lowell Gaertner;Michelle A. Luke;Erin M. O’Mara

  • Nostalgia as enabler of self continuity.

    Constantine Sedikides;Tim Wildschut;Lowell Gaertner;Clay Routledge

  • When rejection by one fosters aggression against many: Multiple-victim aggression as a consequence of social rejection and perceived groupness

    Lowell Gaertner;Jonathan Iuzzini;Erin M. O’Mara

  • Interindividual-intergroup discontinuity reduction through the anticipation of future interaction.

    Chester A. Insko;John Schopler;Lowell Gaertner;Tim Wildschut

  • “Our Country Needs a Strong Leader Right Now”: Economic Inequality Enhances the Wish for a Strong Leader:

    Stefanie Sprong;Jolanda Jetten;Zhechen Wang;Kim Peters

  • A motivational hierarchy within: primacy of the individual self, relational self, or collective self?

    Lowell Gaertner;Constantine Sedikides;Michelle A. Luke;Erin M. O'Mara

  • On Pancultural Self-Enhancement Well-Adjusted Taiwanese Self-Enhance on Personally Valued Traits

    Lowell Gaertner;Constantine Sedikides;Kirk Chang

  • Mechanisms of moral disengagement and their differential use by right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation in support of war.

    Lydia Eckstein Jackson;Lowell Gaertner

  • Us without them: Evidence for an intragroup origin of positive in-group regard.

    Lowell Gaertner;Jonathan Iuzzini;Melissa Guerrero Witt;M. Minda Oriña

  • Individual Self, Relational Self, Collective Self: Hierarchical Ordering of the Tripartite Self

    Constantine Sedikides;Lowell Gaertner;Erin M. O’Mara

  • Intragroup social influence and intergroup competition.

    Tim Wildschut;Chester A. Insko;Lowell Gaertner

  • On the panculturality of self-enhancement and self-protection motivation: the case for the universality of self-esteem

    Constantine Sedikides;Lowell Gaertner;Huajian Cai

  • My head says yes but my heart says no: cognitive and affective attraction as a function of similarity to the ideal self.

    Kenneth C. Herbst;Lowell Gaertner;Chester A. Insko

Frequent Co-Authors

Constantine Sedikides
Constantine Sedikides University of Southampton
Chester A. Insko
Chester A. Insko University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Michael J. A. Wohl
Michael J. A. Wohl Carleton University
Ángel Gómez
Ángel Gómez National University of Distance Education
Huajian Cai
Huajian Cai University of Oklahoma
Ying-yi Hong
Ying-yi Hong Chinese University of Hong Kong
Fabrizio Butera
Fabrizio Butera University of Lausanne
Jolanda Jetten
Jolanda Jetten University of Queensland
Olivier Klein
Olivier Klein Université Libre de Bruxelles
Mario Gollwitzer
Mario Gollwitzer Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München

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

Pursuing an online degree in psychology can open doors to diverse career pathways, including counseling, therapy, and mental health services. One emerging area is marriage and family therapy (MFT), which requires specialized training and certification based on location.

Certification requirements for marriage and family therapists can vary from state to state. For example, the Sacramento mft certification requirements include graduate coursework, supervised clinical experience, and passing a state-approved exam. Similarly, the mft requirements in Saint Paul highlight specific licensure standards in Minnesota.

The path to becoming a therapist might differ in other regions. In Texas, the mft requirements in San Antonio emphasize local regulations and the need for hands-on experience. Meanwhile, the San Diego mft certification requirements detail California-specific criteria for practice.

Understanding these regional differences is important for students considering an online degree and a professional future in counseling or therapy. Researching local certification requirements ensures you meet all necessary qualifications to practice in your desired area.

Best Scientists Citing Lowell Gaertner

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles