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 45 6561 6107 13 13 142 12444

Natalie Sebanz publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Natalie Sebanz between 2003 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Natalie Sebanz published across 24 years, from 2003 to 2026, averaging 6.8 papers a year. Output peaked at 14 publications in 2011. 7 of the 162 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2003 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 14. Peak 14 publications in 2011. 2003: 3 publications 2004: 3 publications 2005: 5 publications 2006: 7 publications 2007: 4 publications 2008: 4 publications 2009: 4 publications 2010: 5 publications 2011: 14 publications 2012: 8 publications 2013: 12 publications 2014: 9 publications 2015: 4 publications 2016: 10 publications 2017: 6 publications 2018: 10 publications 2019: 11 publications 2020: 10 publications 2021: 11 publications 2022: 7 publications 2023: 4 publications 2024: 4 publications 2025: 6 publications 2026: 1 publication
2003 2026

162 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Natalie Sebanz: publications per year, 2003 to 2026
Year Publications
2003 3
2004 3
2005 5
2006 7
2007 4
2008 4
2009 4
2010 5
2011 14
2012 8
2013 12
2014 9
2015 4
2016 10
2017 6
2018 10
2019 11
2020 10
2021 11
2022 7
2023 4
2024 4
2025 6
2026 1
Total 162
Download as CSV

Natalie Sebanz 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 Natalie Sebanz 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, 141–150 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: 142 publications — 45th percentile

45% 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
141–150 597 142
151–160 576
161–170 477
171–180 450
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

Natalie Sebanz 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 Natalie Sebanz 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, 44–45 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: 45 D-Index — 43rd percentile

43% 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
44–45 558 45
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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2017 - German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina - Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina – Nationale Akademie der Wissenschaften Psychology and Cognitive Sciences
  • 2014 - Member of Academia Europaea

Overview

Natalie Sebanz is affiliated with the Central European University in Hungary and conducts research primarily in psychology and neuroscience. Their work spans several subfields including social psychology, cognitive neuroscience, developmental and educational psychology, music, and sociology and political science. The research topics center around action observation and synchronization, child and animal learning development, neuroscience and music perception, motor control and adaptation, face recognition and perception, psychology of moral and emotional judgment, and diverse music education insights.

The scientist's recent publications include:

  • Progress in Joint-Action Research (2021) in Current Directions in Psychological Science
  • Defining key concepts for mental state attribution (2024) in Communications Psychology
  • Computing Joint Action Costs: Co-Actors Minimize the Aggregate Individual Costs in an Action Sequence (2021) in Open Mind
  • Synchronicities that shape the perception of joint action (2020) in Scientific Reports
  • How does a partner's motor variability affect joint action? (2020) in PLoS ONE

Frequent collaborators in their work include:

  • Günther Knoblich
  • Luke Sebanz McEllin
  • Shaheed Azaad
  • Ivana Konvalinka
  • Anna Zamm

Natalie Sebanz has contributed notably to several publication venues, with multiple papers appearing in:

  • Scientific Reports
  • Cognition
  • PLoS ONE
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
  • Current Directions in Psychological Science

In addition to journal articles, the scientist has a book titled Perception and Action in a Social Context published by Cambridge University Press in 2021.

Awards received by Natalie Sebanz include membership in the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina in 2017 in the domain of psychology and cognitive sciences, as well as membership in the Academia Europaea since 2014.

Best Publications

  • Joint action: bodies and minds moving together

    Natalie Sebanz;Harold Bekkering;Günther Knoblich

  • Representing others' actions: just like one's own?

    Natalie Sebanz;Günther Knoblich;Wolfgang Prinz

  • Prediction in Joint Action: What, When, and Where

    Natalie Sebanz;Guenther Knoblich

  • Psychological Research on Joint Action: Theory and Data

    Günther Knoblich;Stephen Andrew Butterfill;Natalie Sebanz

  • 2010 Special Issue: A minimal architecture for joint action

    Cordula Vesper;Stephen Butterfill;Günther Knoblich;Natalie Sebanz

  • How two share a task: Corepresenting stimulus-response mappings

    Natalie Sebanz;Günther Knoblich;Wolfgang Prinz

  • The Social Nature of Perception and Action

    Günther Knoblich;Natalie Sebanz

  • Making oneself predictable: Reduced temporal variability facilitates joint action coordination.

    Cordula Vesper;Robrecht Van der Wel;Gunther Knoblich;Natalie Sebanz

  • Evolving intentions for social interaction: from entrainment to joint action

    Günther Knoblich;Natalie Sebanz

  • Twin Peaks: An ERP Study of Action Planning and Control in Coacting Individuals

    Natalie Sebanz;Günther Knoblich;Wolfgang Prinz;Edmund Wascher

  • Detecting deception in a bluffing body: The role of expertise

    Natalie Sebanz;Maggie Shiffrar

  • Experiencing ownership over a dark-skinned body reduces implicit racial bias

    Lara Maister;Natalie Sebanz;Natalie Sebanz;Günther Knoblich;Manos Tsakiris

  • The joint flanker effect: sharing tasks with real and imagined co-actors

    Silke Atmaca;Natalie Sebanz;Günther Knoblich

  • Let the Force Be With Us: Dyads Exploit Haptic Coupling for Coordination

    Robrecht P. R. D. van der Wel;Guenther Knoblich;Natalie Sebanz

  • Monitoring individual and joint action outcomes in duet music performance

    Janeen D. Loehr;Dimitrios Kourtis;Cordula Vesper;Natalie Sebanz

  • Action co-representation: The joint SNARC effect

    Silke Atmaca;Natalie Sebanz;Wolfgang Prinz;Günther Knoblich

  • The sense of commitment : a minimal approach

    John Michael;Natalie Sebanz;Günther Knoblich

  • Are you ready to jump? Predictive mechanisms in interpersonal coordination.

    Cordula Vesper;Robrecht P. R. D. van der Wel;Günther Knoblich;Natalie Sebanz

  • Do people automatically track others' beliefs? Evidence from a continuous measure.

    Robrecht P. R. D. van der Wel;Natalie Sebanz;Natalie Sebanz;Guenther Knoblich;Guenther Knoblich

  • Effects of a coactor's focus of attention on task performance.

    Anne Böckler;Günther Knoblich;Günther Knoblich;Natalie Sebanz;Natalie Sebanz

  • Invisible Man: Exclusion from shared attention affects gaze behavior and self-reports

    Anne Böckler;Anne Böckler;Paul Hömke;Paul Hömke;Natalie Sebanz;Natalie Sebanz

Frequent Co-Authors

Günther Knoblich
Günther Knoblich Central European University
Wolfgang Prinz
Wolfgang Prinz Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences
Maggie Shiffrar
Maggie Shiffrar Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Chris D. Frith
Chris D. Frith University College London
Glyn W. Humphreys
Glyn W. Humphreys University of Oxford
Gergely Csibra
Gergely Csibra Central European University
Albert Costa
Albert Costa Pompeu Fabra University
Dan Sperber
Dan Sperber Central European University
Sukhvinder S. Obhi
Sukhvinder S. Obhi McMaster University
Heinrich H. Bülthoff
Heinrich H. Bülthoff Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics

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 degree in psychology opens doors to a range of fulfilling careers, both in clinical practice and beyond. Many students opt for online psychology programs, which offer flexibility and a wide curriculum suited for diverse goals. To work as a licensed therapist, additional steps are essential regardless of your location in the U.S.

Each state has specific requirements for licensure. For example, becoming a therapist often means following the Chula Vista licensed therapist requirements in California, or meeting the Cincinnati licensed therapist education requirements in Ohio. Likewise, understanding the Cleveland licensed therapist education requirements is crucial for those planning to practice there.

For individuals interested in counseling roles in Colorado, reviewing the steps for becoming a licensed therapist in Colorado Springs is an important part of preparation. Ultimately, choosing the right degree and understanding state guidelines are key to a rewarding career in psychology.

Best Scientists Citing Natalie Sebanz

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles