World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Psychology 42 7651 7138 345 333 177 5887

Michiel van Elk publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Michiel van Elk between 2007 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Michiel van Elk published across 19 years, from 2007 to 2025, averaging 10.6 papers a year. Output peaked at 20 publications in 2022. 32 of the 202 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2007 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 20. Peak 20 publications in 2022. 2007: 1 publication 2008: 3 publications 2009: 6 publications 2010: 11 publications 2011: 6 publications 2012: 9 publications 2013: 7 publications 2014: 9 publications 2015: 7 publications 2016: 9 publications 2017: 16 publications 2018: 17 publications 2019: 11 publications 2020: 12 publications 2021: 17 publications 2022: 20 publications 2023: 9 publications 2024: 17 publications 2025: 15 publications
2007 2025

202 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Michiel van Elk: publications per year, 2007 to 2025
Year Publications
2007 1
2008 3
2009 6
2010 11
2011 6
2012 9
2013 7
2014 9
2015 7
2016 9
2017 16
2018 17
2019 11
2020 12
2021 17
2022 20
2023 9
2024 17
2025 15
Total 202
Download as CSV

Michiel van Elk 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 Michiel van Elk 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, 171–180 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: 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.

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
171–180 450 177
181–190 397
191–200 343
201–210 328
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

Michiel van Elk 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 Michiel van Elk 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, 42–43 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: 42 D-Index — 36th percentile

36% 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 42
44–45 558
46–47 495
48–49 487
50–51 445
52–53 390
54–55 408
56–57 345
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

Michiel van Elk is affiliated with Leiden University Medical Center in the Netherlands and is actively engaged in research primarily within the fields of psychology and social sciences.

Their research spans several subfields including social psychology, clinical psychology, sociology and political science, cognitive neuroscience, and health. This multidisciplinary approach reflects a broad interest in human behavior and mental processes.

Key topics in Michiel van Elk's work include:

  • Psychedelics and Drug Studies
  • Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
  • Chemical Synthesis and Alkaloids
  • Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Mental Health Research Topics
  • Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Religion and Society Interactions

Michiel van Elk has published extensively, with recent significant papers including:

  • Pharmacological, neural, and psychological mechanisms underlying psychedelics: A critical review, 2022, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
  • History repeating: guidelines to address common problems in psychedelic science, 2023, Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology

These publications contribute to the scientific understanding of psychedelics, their effects, and related methodological challenges. Other relevant works often co-authored or related to their research field include topics on psilocybin microdosing and scientific source credibility effects.

Michiel van Elk frequently collaborates with other researchers. Prominent co-authors in their body of work are:

  • Suzanne Hoogeveen
  • David B. Yaden
  • Bastiaan T. Rutjens
  • Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
  • Josephine Marschall

Their research is commonly disseminated through journals such as Religion Brain & Behavior, International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, Psychopharmacology, Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, and Cortex.

Best Publications

  • You'll never crawl alone: Neurophysiological evidence for experience-dependent motor resonance in infancy

    M. van Elk;H.T. van Schie;S. Hunnius;C. Vesper

  • Action semantics: A unifying conceptual framework for the selective use of multimodal and modality-specific object knowledge

    Michiel van Elk;Hein van Schie;Harold Bekkering

  • Global evidence of extreme intuitive moral prejudice against atheists

    Will M. Gervais;Dimitris Xygalatas;Dimitris Xygalatas;Ryan T. Mckay;Michiel Van Elk

  • The functional role of motor activation in language processing: Motor cortical oscillations support lexical-semantic retrieval

    M. van Elk;H.T. van Schie;R.A. Zwaan;H. Bekkering

  • Brain mechanisms in religion and spirituality: An integrative predictive processing framework

    Michiel van Elk;André Aleman

  • Absorption and spiritual experience: A review of evidence and potential mechanisms

    Michael Lifshitz;Michael Lifshitz;Michiel van Elk;T.M. Luhrmann

  • Meta-analyses are no substitute for registered replications: a skeptical perspective on religious priming.

    Michiel van Elk;Dora Matzke;Quentin F. Gronau;Maime Guan

  • Pharmacological, neural, and psychological mechanisms underlying psychedelics: A critical review

    Unknown

  • Motor activation during observation of unusual versus ordinary actions in infancy.

    Janny C. Stapel;Sabine Hunnius;Michiel van Elk;Harold Bekkering

  • 'Standing in Awe': The effects of awe on body perception and the relation with absorption

    Michiel van Elk;Annika Karinen;Eva Specker;Eftychia Stamkou

  • Paranormal believers are more prone to illusory agency detection than skeptics

    Michiel van Elk

  • How learning to shake a rattle affects 8-month-old infants' perception of the rattle's sound: Electrophysiological evidence for action-effect binding in infancy

    Markus Paulus;Sabine Hunnius;Michiel van Elk;Harold Bekkering

  • Registered Replication Report: Dijksterhuis and van Knippenberg (1998):

    Michael O'Donnell;Leif D Nelson;Evi Ackermann;Balazs Aczel

  • Priming of supernatural agent concepts and agency detection

    Michiel van Elk;Bastiaan T. Rutjens;Joop van der Pligt;Frenk van Harreveld

  • History repeating: guidelines to address common problems in psychedelic science

    Unknown

  • Seeking the Supernatural: The Interactive Religious Experience Model

    Neil Van Leeuwen;Michiel van Elk

  • Do You See What I See?: An Investigation of the Aesthetic Experience in the Laboratory and Museum

    Eva Specker;Pablo P. L. Tinio;Michiel van Elk

  • The neural correlates of the awe experience: Reduced default mode network activity during feelings of awe

    Michiel van Elk;M. Andrea Arciniegas Gomez;Wietske van der Zwaag;Wietske van der Zwaag;Hein T. van Schie

  • Compromised motor planning and Motor Imagery in right Hemiparetic Cerebral Palsy

    Céline Crajé;Michiel van Elk;Manuela Beeren;Hein T. van Schie

  • Embodied cognition: The interplay between automatic resonance and selection-for-action mechanisms

    Shirley-Ann Rueschemeyer;Oliver Lindemann;Michiel van Elk;Harold Bekkering

  • Perceptual Biases in Relation to Paranormal and Conspiracy Beliefs

    Michiel van Elk

  • Mentalizing skills do not differentiate believers from non-believers, but credibility enhancing displays do.

    David L. R. Maij;Frenk van Harreveld;Will M. Gervais;Yann Schrag

  • Dorsal stream areas process action semantics

    Michiel van Elk;Hein T van Schie;Harold Bekkering

Frequent Co-Authors

Harold Bekkering
Harold Bekkering Radboud University
Olaf Blanke
Olaf Blanke École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
Frenk van Harreveld
Frenk van Harreveld University of Amsterdam
Ryan McKay
Ryan McKay Royal Holloway University of London
Joop van der Pligt
Joop van der Pligt University of Amsterdam
Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
Eric-Jan Wagenmakers University of Amsterdam
Joseph Bulbulia
Joseph Bulbulia Victoria University of Wellington
Sabine Hunnius
Sabine Hunnius Radboud University
Marjaana Lindeman
Marjaana Lindeman University of Helsinki
Hannes Bleuler
Hannes Bleuler École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne

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 a psychology degree in the USA opens doors to diverse careers in counseling, therapy, and mental health services. Many students choose online degrees for flexibility and broad access to specialized courses. These programs can prepare you for roles such as mental health counselor, school counselor, or clinical therapist.

Career pathways depend on your location and professional goals. For example, those interested in becoming counselors should be aware of Toledo mental health counselor certification requirements. Similarly, students planning to work in Arizona should explore how to become a mental health counselor in Tucson for region-specific guidance.

Requirements often include a relevant master’s degree and supervised clinical experience. For example, you can learn about mental health counselor requirements in Tulsa and compare them to mental health counselor requirements in Virginia Beach.

Exploring these resources helps ensure you meet all educational and licensing standards for your chosen location, making your path from online psychology degree to professional practice smoother and more successful.

Best Scientists Citing Michiel van Elk

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles