World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
104
Citations
49618
World Ranking
514
National Ranking
326

Matthew D. Lieberman 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 Matthew D. Lieberman 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: 224 publications — 75th percentile

75% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Matthew D. Lieberman 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 Matthew D. Lieberman 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: 104 D-Index — 96th percentile

96% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Matthew D. Lieberman is affiliated with the University of California, Los Angeles in the United States. Their research spans primarily across the fields of Psychology and Neuroscience, with a particular focus on subfields including Cognitive Neuroscience, Social Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Clinical Psychology, and Sociology and Political Science.

Their recent publications cover a variety of topics within these domains. Notable papers include:

  • "Tools of the Trade Multivoxel pattern analysis in fMRI: a practical introduction for social and affective neuroscientists" (2020), published in Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience
  • "Electrocorticographic evidence of a common neurocognitive sequence for mentalizing about the self and others" (2022), published in Nature Communications
  • "Seeing minds, matter, and meaning: The CEEing model of pre-reflective subjective construal." (2022), published in Psychological Review
  • "Generativity and Social Well-Being in Older Women: Expectations Regarding Aging Matter" (2020), published in The Journals of Gerontology Series B
  • "Neural reference groups: a synchrony-based classification approach for predicting attitudes using fNIRS" (2020), published in Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience

The frequent coauthors with whom Matthew D. Lieberman collaborates include:

  • Naomi I. Eisenberger
  • Emily B. Falk
  • Ashley L. Binnquist
  • Kevin M. Tan
  • Macrina C Dieffenbach

The venues where they have most often published research include:

  • Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience
  • Psychological Review
  • PLoS ONE
  • UNC Libraries
  • Nature Neuroscience

Their core research topics reflect an emphasis on Functional Brain Connectivity Studies, Neural dynamics and brain function, Mental Health Research Topics, Face Recognition and Perception, Action Observation and Synchronization, Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior, and Cultural Differences and Values.

Best Publications

  • Does Rejection Hurt? An fMRI Study of Social Exclusion

    Naomi I. Eisenberger;Naomi I. Eisenberger;Matthew D. Lieberman;Matthew D. Lieberman;Kipling D. Williams;Kipling D. Williams

  • Social Cognitive Neuroscience: A Review of Core Processes

    Matthew D. Lieberman

  • Why rejection hurts: a common neural alarm system for physical and social pain

    Naomi I. Eisenberger;Matthew D. Lieberman

  • Intuition: a social cognitive neuroscience approach.

    Matthew D. Lieberman

  • Type I and Type II error concerns in fMRI research: re-balancing the scale

    Matthew D. Lieberman;William A. Cunningham

  • Neural correlates of dispositional mindfulness during affect labeling.

    J. David Creswell;Baldwin M. Way;Naomi I. Eisenberger;Matthew D. Lieberman

  • Putting Feelings Into Words Affect Labeling Disrupts Amygdala Activity in Response to Affective Stimuli

    Matthew D. Lieberman;Naomi I. Eisenberger;Molly J. Crockett;Sabrina M. Tom

  • Social: Why Our Brains Are Wired to Connect

    Matthew D. Lieberman

  • The emergence of social cognitive neuroscience.

    Kevin N. Ochsner;Matthew D. Lieberman

  • The Sunny Side of Fairness Preference for Fairness Activates Reward Circuitry (and Disregarding Unfairness Activates Self-Control Circuitry)

    Golnaz Tabibnia;Ajay B. Satpute;Matthew D. Lieberman

  • Reflexion and reflection: A social cognitive neuroscience approach to attributional inference

    Matthew D. Lieberman;Ruth Gaunt;Daniel T. Gilbert;Yaacov Trope

  • Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction training reduces loneliness and pro-inflammatory gene expression in older adults: A small randomized controlled trial

    J. David Creswell;Michael R. Irwin;Lisa J. Burklund;Matthew D. Lieberman

  • Neural pathways link social support to attenuated neuroendocrine stress responses.

    Naomi I. Eisenberger;Shelley E. Taylor;Shelly L. Gable;Clayton J. Hilmert

  • Watching social interactions produces dorsomedial prefrontal and medial parietal BOLD fMRI signal increases compared to a resting baseline

    Marco Iacoboni;Matthew D Lieberman;Barbara J Knowlton;Istvan Molnar-Szakacs

  • Attachment figures activate a safety signal-related neural region and reduce pain experience.

    Naomi I. Eisenberger;Sarah L. Master;Tristen K. Inagaki;Shelley E. Taylor

  • Serotonin Modulates Behavioral Reactions to Unfairness

    Molly J. Crockett;Molly J. Crockett;Luke Clark;Luke Clark;Golnaz Tabibnia;Golnaz Tabibnia;Matthew D. Lieberman;Matthew D. Lieberman

  • An fMRI investigation of race-related amygdala activity in African-American and Caucasian-American individuals

    Matthew D Lieberman;Ahmad Hariri;Johanna M Jarcho;Naomi I Eisenberger

  • An experimental study of shared sensitivity to physical pain and social rejection

    Naomi I. Eisenberger;Johanna M. Jarcho;Matthew D. Lieberman;Bruce D. Naliboff

  • Do Amnesics Exhibit Cognitive Dissonance Reduction? The Role of Explicit Memory and Attention in Attitude Change

    Matthew D. Lieberman;Kevin N. Ochsner;Daniel T. Gilbert;Daniel L. Schacter

  • Integrating automatic and controlled processes into neurocognitive models of social cognition

    Ajay B. Satpute;Matthew D. Lieberman

  • Craving love? Enduring grief activates brain's reward center

    Mary Frances O'Connor;David K. Wellisch;Annette L. Stanton;Annette L. Stanton;Naomi I. Eisenberger

Frequent Co-Authors

Naomi I. Eisenberger
Naomi I. Eisenberger University of California, Los Angeles
Emily B. Falk
Emily B. Falk University of Pennsylvania
Elliot T. Berkman
Elliot T. Berkman University of Oregon
Michelle G. Craske
Michelle G. Craske University of California, Los Angeles
Andrew J. Fuligni
Andrew J. Fuligni University of California, Los Angeles
Shelley E. Taylor
Shelley E. Taylor University of California, Los Angeles
Eva H. Telzer
Eva H. Telzer University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Adriana Galván
Adriana Galván University of California, Los Angeles
Darby E. Saxbe
Darby E. Saxbe University of Southern California
Michael R. Irwin
Michael R. Irwin University of California, Los Angeles

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 psychology in the USA can open doors to numerous related online degrees and career pathways. One popular profession is speech-language pathology, which blends psychological principles with hands-on communication therapy. Each state has its own licensing rules and education requirements, making it important to review local guidelines.

For example, if you’re interested in becoming a speech therapist in Georgia, you’ll need to follow specific steps, including graduate coursework and clinical experience. Similarly, there are distinct Hawaii speech pathologist certification requirements that future professionals must meet before starting practice.

Considering other states? Learn more about how to become a speech language pathologist in Idaho or discover the specific slp requirements in Illinois.

Online programs offer flexible learning options for those looking to specialize in psychology-related careers, making it easier to meet licensing requirements across the U.S. Be sure to research your state’s regulations as you plan your career path in this rewarding and growing field.

Best Scientists Citing Matthew D. Lieberman

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles