World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
56
Citations
12565
World Ranking
4204
National Ranking
230

Matthias Schlesewsky 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 Matthias Schlesewsky 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: 177 publications — 61st percentile

61% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Matthias Schlesewsky 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 Matthias Schlesewsky 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: 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.

Overview

Matthias Schlesewsky is affiliated with the University of South Australia in Australia and has a research focus that spans multiple interrelated fields. Their primary areas of study include Neuroscience and Psychology, with a particular emphasis on Cognitive Neuroscience. The scope of their work also extends into Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Artificial Intelligence, and Language and Linguistics.

The scientist's research topics are diverse yet interconnected, covering aspects of neural dynamics, brain function, and neurobiology related to language and bilingualism. Additional topics in their oeuvre involve neural and behavioral psychology studies, EEG and brain-computer interfaces, functional brain connectivity, reading and literacy development, and the cognitive processes associated with language and metaphor.

Matthias Schlesewsky has contributed extensively to scientific literature, with numerous recent publications in peer-reviewed journals. Key recent papers include:

  • Oscillatory and Aperiodic Neural Activity Jointly Predict Language Learning (2022), Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Resting-state aperiodic neural dynamics predict individual differences in visuomotor performance and learning (2021), Human Movement Science
  • Reading Poetry and Prose: Eye Movements and Acoustic Evidence (2022), Discourse Processes
  • EEG and behavioral correlates of attentional processing while walking and navigating naturalistic environments (2021), Scientific Reports
  • Rapid adaptation of predictive models during language comprehension: Aperiodic EEG slope, individual alpha frequency and idea density modulate individual differences in real-time model updating (2022), Frontiers in Psychology

Their scholarly output is frequently published in notable venues such as bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), where they have at least 14 publications, as well as the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Scientific Reports, Discourse Processes, and Human Movement Science.

Throughout their career, Matthias Schlesewsky has collaborated often with a core group of co-authors, including Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Zachariah R. Cross, Maarten A. Immink, Alex Chatburn, and Andrew W. Corcoran. These collaborations reflect an ongoing engagement with interdisciplinary teams working at the intersection of neuroscience, psychology, and linguistics.

Best Publications

  • The Extended Argument Dependency Model: A Neurocognitive Approach to Sentence Comprehension across Languages.

    Ina Bornkessel;Matthias Schlesewsky

  • Two routes to actorhood: lexicalized potency to act and identification of the actor role

    Sabine Frenzel;Matthias Schlesewsky;Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky

  • An alternative perspective on "semantic P600" effects in language comprehension.

    Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky;Matthias Schlesewsky

  • Separating syntactic memory costs and syntactic integration costs during parsing: the processing of German WH-questions

    Christian J. Fiebach;Matthias Schlesewsky;Angela D. Friederici

  • Who did what to whom? The neural basis of argument hierarchies during language comprehension.

    Ina Bornkessel;Stefan Zysset;Angela D. Friederici;D. Yves von Cramon

  • Revisiting the role of Broca's area in sentence processing: Syntactic integration versus syntactic working memory

    Christian J. Fiebach;M. Schlesewsky;G. Lohmann;D. Y. von Cramon

  • Processing Linguistic Complexity and Grammaticality in the Left Frontal Cortex

    Angela D. Friederici;Christian J. Fiebach;Matthias Schlesewsky;Ina D. Bornkessel

  • Syntactic working memory and the establishment of filler-gap dependencies: insights from ERPs and fMRI.

    Christian J. Fiebach;Matthias Schlesewsky;Angela D. Friederici

  • The role of prominence information in the real time comprehension of transitive constructions: A cross-linguistic approach

    Ina D. Bornkessel-Schlesewsky;Matthias Schlesewsky

  • Reconciling time, space and function: A new dorsal–ventral stream model of sentence comprehension

    Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky;Matthias Schlesewsky

  • The N400 reflects problems of thematic hierarchizing

    Stefan Frisch;Matthias Schlesewsky

  • Neurobiological roots of language in primate audition: common computational properties.

    Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky;Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky;Matthias Schlesewsky;Steven L. Small;Josef P. Rauschecker

  • Subjective Impressions Do Not Mirror Online Reading Effort: Concurrent EEG-Eyetracking Evidence from the Reading of Books and Digital Media

    Franziska Kretzschmar;Dominique Pleimling;Jana Hosemann;Stephan Füssel

  • To Predict or Not to Predict: Influences of Task and Strategy on the Processing of Semantic Relations

    Dietmar Roehm;Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky;Frank Rösler;Matthias Schlesewsky

  • The Subject Preference in the Processing of Locally Ambiguous WH-Questions in German

    Matthias Schlesewsky;Gisbert Fanselow;Reinhold Kliegl;Josef Krems

  • The P600-as-P3 hypothesis revisited: single-trial analyses reveal that the late EEG positivity following linguistically deviant material is reaction time aligned.

    Jona Sassenhagen;Jona Sassenhagen;Matthias Schlesewsky;Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky;Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky

  • The P600 as an indicator of syntactic ambiguity

    Stefan Frisch;Matthias Schlesewsky;Douglas Saddy;Annegret Alpermann

  • Processing Syntax and Morphology: A Neurocognitive Perspective

    Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky;Matthias Schlesewsky

  • Multi-dimensional contributions to garden path strength: Dissociating phrase structure from case marking

    Ina Bornkessel;Brian McElree;Matthias Schlesewsky;Angela D. Friederici

  • Think globally: cross-linguistic variation in electrophysiological activity during sentence comprehension.

    Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky;Franziska Kretzschmar;Franziska Kretzschmar;Sarah Tune;Luming Wang

  • On the universality of language comprehension strategies: evidence from Turkish.

    Şükrü Barış Demiral;Matthias Schlesewsky;Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky

Frequent Co-Authors

Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky
Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky University of South Australia
Angela D. Friederici
Angela D. Friederici Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences
Christian J. Fiebach
Christian J. Fiebach Goethe University Frankfurt
D. Yves von Cramon
D. Yves von Cramon Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences
Stefan Zysset
Stefan Zysset Max Planck Society
Steven L. Small
Steven L. Small The University of Texas at Dallas
Martin Meyer
Martin Meyer University of Zurich
Reinhold Kliegl
Reinhold Kliegl University of Potsdam
Josef P. Rauschecker
Josef P. Rauschecker Georgetown University Medical Center
M. Gareth Gaskell
M. Gareth Gaskell University of York

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

A degree in psychology opens doors to a wide array of online programs and diverse career pathways in the mental health field. Many aspiring professionals choose to become licensed therapists or counselors, often specializing in areas such as marriage and family therapy or general clinical practice.

If you are interested in working with couples and families, you might want to learn more about how to become a marriage and family therapist in Wichita or explore the specific mft requirements in Winston Salem. These resources highlight key educational and licensing steps needed, from earning a graduate degree to supervised clinical experience.

Those looking to practice as licensed counselors can review steps for becoming a licensed therapist in Albuquerque or understand how to become a licensed therapist in Anaheim. Requirements may include accredited degrees, national exams, and state-specific licensure processes.

Online psychology programs provide flexibility for aspiring professionals seeking to balance their studies with other commitments, while supporting a variety of career ambitions in today’s evolving mental health landscape.

Best Scientists Citing Matthias Schlesewsky

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles