World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
37
Citations
4700
World Ranking
9268
National Ranking
4906

Neuroscience

D-Index
37
Citations
4700
World Ranking
8848
National Ranking
3744

Neil W. Mulligan 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 Neil W. Mulligan sits on this spectrum.

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 scientists 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38 publications 887+

This scientist: 119 publications — 27th percentile

27% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Neil W. Mulligan 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 Neil W. Mulligan sits on this spectrum.

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 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 37 D-Index — 10th percentile

10% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Neil W. Mulligan is affiliated with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on neuroscience and psychology, with a particular emphasis on cognitive neuroscience and experimental and cognitive psychology.

The scientist's work addresses various topics within the fields of memory and cognition. Main areas of research include:

  • Memory Processes and Influences
  • Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Deception detection and forensic psychology
  • Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Face Recognition and Perception
  • Psychological and Educational Research Studies

Neil W. Mulligan has contributed to several peer-reviewed journals with a notable number of publications in the following venues:

  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition (6 publications)
  • Memory (4 publications)
  • Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (3 publications)
  • UNC Libraries (3 publications)
  • Journal of Educational Psychology (2 publications)

Frequent collaborators include Zachary L. Buchin, Pietro Spataro, Clelia Rossi-Arnaud, John Thomas West, and Daniele Saraulli.

Recent papers authored or co-authored by Neil W. Mulligan showcase research on memory and attentional processes, including:

  • The attentional boost effect and source memory, 2021, Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition
  • Immersion, presence, and episodic memory in virtual reality environments, 2021, Memory
  • Retrieval-based learning and prior knowledge, 2022, Journal of Educational Psychology
  • The attentional boost effect enhances the recognition of bound features in short-term memory, 2020, Memory
  • Levels of retrieval and the testing effect, 2020, Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition

Best Publications

  • The Role of Attention During Encoding in Implicit and Explicit Memory

    Neil W. Mulligan

  • Divided attention and indirect memory tests.

    Neil W. Mulligan;Marilyn Hartman

  • Measuring the bases of recognition memory: An investigation of the process-dissociation framework

    Neil W. Mulligan;Elliot Hirshman

  • Attention and implicit memory tests: The effects of varying attentional load on conceptual priming

    Neil W. Mulligan

  • Easily perceived, easily remembered? Perceptual interference produces a double dissociation between metamemory and memory performance

    Miri Besken;Neil W. Mulligan

  • Memory for actions: Enactment and source memory

    Susan L. Hornstein;Neil W. Mulligan

  • Divided attention can enhance memory encoding: the attentional boost effect in implicit memory.

    Pietro Spataro;Neil W. Mulligan;Clelia Rossi-Arnaud

  • The effects of perceptual interference at encoding on organization and order: investigating the roles of item-specific and relational information.

    Neil W. Mulligan

  • Self-Generation and Memory

    Neil W. Mulligan;Jeffrey P. Lozito

  • Perceptual interference improves explicit memory but does not enhance data-driven processing.

    Elliot Hirshman;Neil Mulligan

  • Generation and hypermnesia.

    Neil W. Mulligan

  • Speed-Accuracy Trade-Offs and the Dual Process Model of Recognition Memory

    Neil Mulligan;Elliot Hirshman

  • Inhibition and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adults.

    Janet M. Ossmann;Neil W. Mulligan

  • The effects of perceptual interference at encoding on implicit memory, explicit memory, and memory for source.

    Neil W. Mulligan

  • Memory for actions: self-performed tasks and the reenactment effect.

    Neil W. Mulligan;Susan L. Hornstein

  • The effects of list composition and perceptual fluency on judgments of learning (JOLs)

    Jonathan A. Susser;Neil W. Mulligan;Miri Besken

  • Generation and Memory for Contextual Detail.

    Neil W. Mulligan

  • Perceptual fluency, auditory generation, and metamemory: analyzing the perceptual fluency hypothesis in the auditory modality.

    Miri Besken;Neil W. Mulligan

  • The negative testing effect and multifactor account.

    Daniel J. Peterson;Neil W. Mulligan

  • Attention and perceptual priming in the perceptual identification task.

    Neil W. Mulligan;Susan L. Hornstein

Frequent Co-Authors

Katherine A. Rawson
Katherine A. Rawson Kent State University

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 can open doors to diverse career options in healthcare, mental health, and research. If you are interested in online degrees that complement neuroscience, several pathways are worth considering—especially those focusing on psychology, therapy, and social work.

For those drawn to counseling or therapy roles, exploring the best online mft programs is a smart choice. These programs equip students with skills to support families and couples in clinical and community settings.

A psychology background is also highly compatible with neuroscience studies. If you are curious about affordability, you can learn how much does a masters in psychology cost or explore a range of psychology degree options online. Such degrees provide strong foundations in behavioral science, research, and patient care.

Additionally, those interested in advocacy or clinical social work might consider an online master's in social work. This pathway enables graduates to work closely with communities, mental health services, and vulnerable populations.

Best Scientists Citing Neil W. Mulligan

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles