World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Natalie L. Denburg

Natalie L. Denburg

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Psychology 39 8430 7873 4505 4102 101 9319
Neuroscience 39 8235 7605 3532 3194 100 9317

Natalie L. Denburg publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Natalie L. Denburg between 1996 and 2024, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Natalie L. Denburg published across 29 years, from 1996 to 2024, averaging 3.6 papers a year. Output peaked at 11 publications in 2013. 6 of the 105 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
2 4 6 8 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1996 to 2024. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 11. Peak 11 publications in 2013. 1996: 2 publications 1997: 2 publications 1998: 1 publication 1999: 1 publication 2000: 1 publication 2001: 4 publications 2002: 2 publications 2003: 2 publications 2004: 1 publication 2005: 2 publications 2006: 1 publication 2007: 3 publications 2008: 1 publication 2009: 6 publications 2010: 4 publications 2011: 8 publications 2012: 7 publications 2013: 11 publications 2014: 7 publications 2015: 3 publications 2016: 5 publications 2017: 1 publication 2018: 3 publications 2019: 7 publications 2020: 5 publications 2021: 5 publications 2022: 4 publications 2023: 3 publications 2024: 3 publications
1996 2024

105 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Natalie L. Denburg: publications per year, 1996 to 2024
Year Publications
1996 2
1997 2
1998 1
1999 1
2000 1
2001 4
2002 2
2003 2
2004 1
2005 2
2006 1
2007 3
2008 1
2009 6
2010 4
2011 8
2012 7
2013 11
2014 7
2015 3
2016 5
2017 1
2018 3
2019 7
2020 5
2021 5
2022 4
2023 3
2024 3
Total 105
Download as CSV

Natalie L. Denburg publication distribution in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Neuroscience in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Natalie L. Denburg sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300 400 500
Bar chart with 86 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 38–47 to 887+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 539. Most scientists, 539, have 98–107 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 887 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 98–107 publications, is where this scientist sits. 38–47 publications: 18 scientists 48–57 publications: 79 scientists 58–67 publications: 193 scientists 68–77 publications: 323 scientists 78–87 publications: 406 scientists 88–97 publications: 452 scientists 98–107 publications: 539 scientists 108–117 publications: 505 scientists 118–127 publications: 522 scientists 128–137 publications: 469 scientists 138–147 publications: 456 scientists 148–157 publications: 459 scientists 158–167 publications: 397 scientists 168–177 publications: 383 scientists 178–187 publications: 350 scientists 188–197 publications: 302 scientists 198–207 publications: 306 scientists 208–217 publications: 262 scientists 218–227 publications: 242 scientists 228–237 publications: 220 scientists 238–247 publications: 203 scientists 248–257 publications: 174 scientists 258–267 publications: 176 scientists 268–277 publications: 175 scientists 278–287 publications: 125 scientists 288–297 publications: 116 scientists 298–307 publications: 127 scientists 308–317 publications: 128 scientists 318–327 publications: 99 scientists 328–337 publications: 89 scientists 338–347 publications: 78 scientists 348–357 publications: 96 scientists 358–367 publications: 66 scientists 368–377 publications: 59 scientists 378–387 publications: 65 scientists 388–397 publications: 54 scientists 398–407 publications: 48 scientists 408–417 publications: 49 scientists 418–427 publications: 34 scientists 428–437 publications: 31 scientists 438–447 publications: 30 scientists 448–457 publications: 31 scientists 458–467 publications: 36 scientists 468–477 publications: 40 scientists 478–487 publications: 35 scientists 488–497 publications: 30 scientists 498–507 publications: 23 scientists 508–517 publications: 26 scientists 518–527 publications: 20 scientists 528–537 publications: 23 scientists 538–547 publications: 20 scientists 548–557 publications: 20 scientists 558–567 publications: 17 scientists 568–577 publications: 14 scientists 578–587 publications: 20 scientists 588–597 publications: 20 scientists 598–607 publications: 19 scientists 608–617 publications: 18 scientists 618–627 publications: 17 scientists 628–637 publications: 11 scientists 638–647 publications: 11 scientists 648–657 publications: 11 scientists 658–667 publications: 8 scientists 668–677 publications: 7 scientists 678–687 publications: 11 scientists 688–697 publications: 10 scientists 698–707 publications: 4 scientists 708–717 publications: 6 scientists 718–727 publications: 5 scientists 728–737 publications: 5 scientists 738–747 publications: 9 scientists 748–757 publications: 9 scientists 758–767 publications: 3 scientists 768–777 publications: 7 scientists 778–787 publications: 7 scientists 788–797 publications: 6 scientists 798–807 publications: 2 scientists 808–817 publications: 2 scientists 818–827 publications: 7 scientists 828–837 publications: 0 scientists 838–847 publications: 9 scientists 848–857 publications: 3 scientists 858–867 publications: 1 scientist 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38–47 publications 887+

This scientist: 100 publications — 17th percentile

17% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 887 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Neuroscience scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,597 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
38–47 18
48–57 79
58–67 193
68–77 323
78–87 406
88–97 452
98–107 539 100
108–117 505
118–127 522
128–137 469
138–147 456
148–157 459
158–167 397
168–177 383
178–187 350
188–197 302
198–207 306
208–217 262
218–227 242
228–237 220
238–247 203
248–257 174
258–267 176
268–277 175
278–287 125
288–297 116
298–307 127
308–317 128
318–327 99
328–337 89
338–347 78
348–357 96
358–367 66
368–377 59
378–387 65
388–397 54
398–407 48
408–417 49
418–427 34
428–437 31
438–447 30
448–457 31
458–467 36
468–477 40
478–487 35
488–497 30
498–507 23
508–517 26
518–527 20
528–537 23
538–547 20
548–557 20
558–567 17
568–577 14
578–587 20
588–597 20
598–607 19
608–617 18
618–627 17
628–637 11
638–647 11
648–657 11
658–667 8
668–677 7
678–687 11
688–697 10
698–707 4
708–717 6
718–727 5
728–737 5
738–747 9
748–757 9
758–767 3
768–777 7
778–787 7
788–797 6
798–807 2
808–817 2
818–827 7
828–837 0
838–847 9
848–857 3
858–867 1
868–877 3
878–886 6
887+ 100
Download as CSV

Natalie L. Denburg D-index placement in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Neuroscience scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Natalie L. Denburg sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300 400 500
Bar chart with 68 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 163+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 512. Most scientists, 512, have 46–47 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 163 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 38–39 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 30–31 D-Index: 42 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 172 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 296 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 435 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 459 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 456 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 467 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 478 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 512 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 435 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 425 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 418 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 392 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 357 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 334 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 328 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 260 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 278 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 239 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 250 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 210 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 200 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 189 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 170 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 146 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 113 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 126 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 100 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 84 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 99 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 84 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 85 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 72 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 76 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 45 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 49 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 43 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 32 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 45 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 50 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 32 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 39 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 29 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 27 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 19 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 23 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 27 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 16 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 24 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 13 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 21 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 17 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 14 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 15 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 10 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 10 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 13 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 9 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 8 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 6 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 6 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 7 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 7 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 10 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 4 scientists 162 D-Index: 8 scientists 163+ D-Index: 100 scientists
30–31 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 39 D-Index — 15th percentile

15% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 163 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Neuroscience scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,597 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 42
32–33 172
34–35 296
36–37 435
38–39 459 39
40–41 456
42–43 467
44–45 478
46–47 512
48–49 435
50–51 425
52–53 418
54–55 392
56–57 357
58–59 334
60–61 328
62–63 260
64–65 278
66–67 239
68–69 250
70–71 210
72–73 200
74–75 189
76–77 170
78–79 146
80–81 113
82–83 126
84–85 100
86–87 84
88–89 99
90–91 84
92–93 85
94–95 72
96–97 76
98–99 45
100–101 49
102–103 43
104–105 32
106–107 45
108–109 50
110–111 32
112–113 39
114–115 32
116–117 29
118–119 27
120–121 19
122–123 23
124–125 27
126–127 16
128–129 24
130–131 13
132–133 21
134–135 17
136–137 14
138–139 15
140–141 10
142–143 10
144–145 13
146–147 9
148–149 8
150–151 6
152–153 6
154–155 7
156–157 7
158–159 10
160–161 4
162 8
163+ 100
Download as CSV

Overview

Natalie L. Denburg is affiliated with the University of Iowa in the United States. Their research primarily spans the fields of psychology and medicine, with a concentrated focus on clinical psychology, psychiatry and mental health, social psychology, neuropsychology and physiological psychology, as well as experimental and cognitive psychology.

The scientist's work addresses a variety of topics related to aging and cognition, including aging and gerontology research, psychosomatic disorders and their treatments, dementia and cognitive impairment research, psychological well-being and life satisfaction, circadian rhythm and melatonin, tryptophan and brain disorders, and sleep and related disorders.

Frequent publication venues for their work include:

  • Frontiers in Psychology
  • The Lancet Neurology
  • Frontiers in Neuroscience
  • Journal of Women & Aging
  • Journal of Alzheimer s Disease

Notable recent papers authored or coauthored by Natalie L. Denburg include:

  • Safety and efficacy of pioglitazone for the delay of cognitive impairment in people at risk of Alzheimer's disease (TOMMORROW): a prognostic biomarker study and a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (2021) - The Lancet Neurology
  • The Role of Emotional vs. Cognitive Intelligence in Economic Decision-Making Amongst Older Adults (2020) - Frontiers in Neuroscience
  • The influence of social support on cognitive health in older women: a Women's Health Initiative study (2021) - Journal of Women & Aging
  • Reduced Retinal Thickness Predicts Age-Related Changes in Cognitive Function (2020) - Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
  • Interoception, Affect, and Cognition in Older Adults (2023) - Experimental Aging Research

Their research outputs often involve collaboration with recurring coauthors such as Daniel Tranel, James R. Burke, Marilyn Steinbach, Tricia K. Neppl, and Emily B.K. Thomas.

Natalie L. Denburg's expertise and research cover a multidisciplinary approach combining psychological perspectives with neurobiological and clinical insights to explore cognitive and emotional processes affecting older adults and individuals at risk of neurodegenerative diseases.

Best Publications

  • Decision-making deficits, linked to a dysfunctional ventromedial prefrontal cortex, revealed in alcohol and stimulant abusers.

    Antoine Bechara;Sara Dolan;Natalie Denburg;Andrea Hindes

  • Exploring the neurological substrate of emotional and social intelligence.

    Reuven Bar-On;Daniel Tranel;Natalie L. Denburg;Antoine Bechara

  • Asymmetric functional roles of right and left ventromedial prefrontal cortices in social conduct, decision-making, and emotional processing.

    Daniel Tranel;Antoine Bechara;Natalie L Denburg

  • The ability to decide advantageously declines prematurely in some normal older persons

    N.L. Denburg;D. Tranel;A. Bechara

  • Evidence for preserved emotional memory in normal older persons.

    Natalie L. Denburg;Tony W. Buchanan;Daniel Tranel;Ralph Adolphs

  • Economic games quantify diminished sense of guilt in patients with damage to the prefrontal cortex

    Ian Krajbich;Ralph Adolphs;Daniel Tranel;Natalie L. Denburg

  • Network measures predict neuropsychological outcome after brain injury

    David E. Warren;Jonathan D. Power;Joel Bruss;Natalie L. Denburg

  • The Orbitofrontal Cortex, Real-World Decision Making, and Normal Aging

    Natalie L. Denburg;Catherine A. Cole;Michael Hernandez;Torricia H. Yamada

  • Does gender play a role in functional asymmetry of ventromedial prefrontal cortex

    Daniel Tranel;Hanna Damasio;Natalie L. Denburg;Antoine Bechara

  • Adult norms for the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test and for supplemental recognition and matching trials from the Extended Complex Figure Test.

    Philip S. Fastenau;Natalie L. Denburg;Bradley J. Hufford

  • The amygdala's role in long-term declarative memory for gist and detail.

    Ralph Adolphs;Natalie L. Denburg;Daniel Tranel

  • Impaired Emotional Declarative Memory Following Unilateral Amygdala Damage

    Ralph Adolphs;Daniel Tranel;Natalie Denburg

  • Trajectory of risky decision making for potential gains and losses from ages 5 to 85.

    Joshua A. Weller;Irwin P. Levin;Natalie L. Denburg

  • Psychophysiological anticipation of positive outcomes promotes advantageous decision-making in normal older persons.

    Natalie L. Denburg;Emily C. Recknor;Antoine Bechara;Daniel Tranel

  • Parallel short forms for the Boston Naming Test : Psychometric properties and norms for older adults

    Philip S. Fastenau;Natalie L. Denburg;Beth A. Mauer

  • Inhibitory changes after age 60 and their relationship to measures of attention and memory.

    Carol C. Persad;Norman Abeles;Rose T. Zacks;Natalie L. Denburg

  • Declarative memory is critical for sustained advantageous complex decision-making

    Rupa Gupta;Melissa C. Duff;Natalie L. Denburg;Neal J. Cohen

  • Neuropsychological Outcomes of Older Breast Cancer Survivors: Cognitive Features Ten or More Years After Chemotherapy

    B.A. Torricia H. Yamada;Natalie L. Denburg;Leigh J. Beglinger;Susan K. Schultz

  • Medial pfc damage abolishes the self-reference effect

    Carissa L. Philippi;Melissa C. Duff;Natalie L. Denburg;Daniel Tranel

  • Verbal and Nonverbal Emotional Memory Following Unilateral Amygdala Damage

    Tony W. Buchanan;Natalie L. Denburg;Daniel Tranel;Ralph Adolphs

Frequent Co-Authors

Daniel Tranel
Daniel Tranel University of Iowa
Antoine Bechara
Antoine Bechara University of Southern California
Ralph Adolphs
Ralph Adolphs California Institute of Technology
Mark A. Espeland
Mark A. Espeland Wake Forest University
Melissa C. Duff
Melissa C. Duff Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Leigh J. Beglinger
Leigh J. Beglinger University of Iowa
Tony W. Buchanan
Tony W. Buchanan Saint Louis University
Robert B. Wallace
Robert B. Wallace University of Iowa
JoAnn E. Manson
JoAnn E. Manson Harvard Medical School
Judith K. Ockene
Judith K. Ockene University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School

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 Neuroscience opens doors to many interdisciplinary careers that blend brain science with social, behavioral, and clinical services. If you’re considering flexible options, there are a range of relevant online degrees designed for convenience and affordability.

For those interested in mental health and social advocacy, many online msw programs affordable are available, allowing graduates to pursue careers as social workers focusing on neurological or psychological conditions. If you’re looking for an accelerated path, a 1 year online master's in social work can help you quickly enter the workforce.

Another popular career pathway is behavior analysis. An accelerated bcba program online allows you to become a Board Certified Behavior Analyst—an in-demand role in healthcare and education for those with a neuroscience background.

If you’re drawn to research or clinical practice, an online accelerated psychology degree can provide essential skills and foundational knowledge. These flexible options make it easier to gain qualifications that complement and expand your neuroscience studies.

Best Scientists Citing Natalie L. Denburg

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles