World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
45
Citations
13555
World Ranking
6542
National Ranking
3549

Paul Verhaeghen 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 Paul Verhaeghen 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: 140 publications — 44th percentile

44% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Paul Verhaeghen 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 Paul Verhaeghen 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: 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.

Overview

Paul Verhaeghen is a researcher affiliated with the Georgia Institute of Technology in the United States. Their academic work primarily focuses on the field of psychology, with a particular emphasis on clinical psychology, experimental and cognitive psychology, social psychology, cognitive neuroscience, and developmental and educational psychology.

The main research topics that feature prominently in their publications include mindfulness and compassion interventions, psychological well-being and life satisfaction, COVID-19 and mental health, anxiety, depression, psychometrics, treatment and cognitive processes, sleep and related disorders, memory processes and influences, as well as neural and behavioral psychology studies.

Verhaeghen has contributed to literature published in several recurring scientific venues. Frequent publication outlets include:

  • Mindfulness
  • Nature Human Behaviour
  • Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
  • Journal of American College Health
  • The Journals of Gerontology Series B

Some of their recent research papers are:

  • Mindfulness as Attention Training: Meta-Analyses on the Links Between Attention Performance and Mindfulness Interventions, Long-Term Meditation Practice, and Trait Mindfulness (2020), published in Mindfulness
  • Evidence that ageing yields improvements as well as declines across attention and executive functions (2021), published in Nature Human Behaviour
  • A systematic review and meta-analysis of individual differences in naturalistic sleep quality and episodic memory performance in young and older adults (2021), published in Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

They frequently collaborate with a set of co-authors, including Grazia Mirabito, Shelley N. Aikman, Audrey Duarte, Vonetta M. Dotson, and Andrew M. Gradone. Their collaboration counts range from two to eight joint publications, indicating ongoing research partnerships.

Best Publications

  • Meta-analyses of age–cognition relations in adulthood: Estimates of linear and nonlinear age effects and structural models.

    Paul Verhaeghen;Timothy A. Salthouse

  • Aging, executive control, and attention: a review of meta-analyses.

    Paul Verhaeghen;John Cerella

  • Aging and vocabulary scores: a meta-analysis.

    Paul Verhaeghen

  • Improving memory performance in the aged through mnemonic training: a meta-analytic study.

    Paul Verhaeghen;Alfons Marcoen;Luc Goossens

  • Aging and Verbal Memory Span: A Meta-Analysis

    Kara L. Bopp;Paul Verhaeghen

  • Making Working Memory Work A Meta-Analysis of Executive-Control and Working Memory Training in Older Adults

    Julia Karbach;Paul Verhaeghen

  • Aging and dual-task performance: a meta-analysis.

    Paul Verhaeghen;David W. Steitz;Martin J. Sliwinski;John Cerella

  • Facts and fiction about memory aging: a quantitative integration of research findings

    Paul Verhaeghen;Alfons Marcoen;Luc Goossens

  • Aging and the Stroop effect: a meta-analysis.

    Paul Verhaeghen;Lieve De Meersman

  • The fate of cognition in very old age: Six-year longitudinal findings in the Berlin Aging Study (BASE)

    Tania Singer;Paul Verhaeghen;Paolo Ghisletta;Ulman Lindenberger

  • Aging and Executive Control: Reports of a Demise Greatly Exaggerated:

    Paul Verhaeghen

  • Aging and Task Switching: A Meta-Analysis

    Christina Wasylyshyn;Paul Verhaeghen;Martin J. Sliwinski

  • Why we sing the blues: the relation between self-reflective rumination, mood, and creativity.

    Paul Verhaeghen;Jutta Joorman;Rodney Khan

  • Ageing and switching of the focus of attention in working memory: results from a modified N-back task.

    Paul Verhaeghen;Chandramallika Basak

  • On the mechanisms of plasticity in young and older adults after instruction in the method of loci: evidence for an amplification model.

    Paul Verhaeghen;Alfons Marcoen

  • Adult age and digit symbol substitution performance: a meta-analysis.

    William J. Hoyer;Robert S. Stawski;Christina Wasylyshyn;Paul Verhaeghen

  • A working memory workout: how to expand the focus of serial attention from one to four items in 10 hours or less.

    Paul Verhaeghen;John Cerella;Chandramallika Basak

  • Trait Anger, Anger Expression, and Ambulatory Blood Pressure: A Meta-Analytic Review

    Jennifer L. Schum;Randall S. Jorgensen;Paul Verhaeghen;Marie Sauro

  • Aging and the negative priming effect: a meta-analysis.

    Paul Verhaeghen;Lieve De Meersman

  • Depression and Cognitive Control across the Lifespan: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

    Vonetta M. Dotson;Shawn M. McClintock;Shawn M. McClintock;Paul Verhaeghen;Joseph U. Kim

  • "Improving memory performance in the aged through mnemonic training: A meta-analytic study": Correction.

    Paul Verhaeghen;Alfons Marcoen;Luc Goossens

Frequent Co-Authors

Luc Goossens
Luc Goossens KU Leuven
William J. Hoyer
William J. Hoyer Syracuse University
Mike Martin
Mike Martin University of Zurich
Maxine Weinstein
Maxine Weinstein Georgetown University
Reinhold Kliegl
Reinhold Kliegl University of Potsdam
Michael T. Ullman
Michael T. Ullman Georgetown University
Martin J. Sliwinski
Martin J. Sliwinski Pennsylvania State University
Johannes Michalak
Johannes Michalak Witten/Herdecke University
Shawn M. McClintock
Shawn M. McClintock The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
Noreen Goldman
Noreen Goldman Princeton 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

Pursuing a psychology degree in the USA opens doors to various specialized career paths. Many graduates choose to become Marriage and Family Therapists (MFTs), a field that offers both personal fulfillment and job stability. However, requirements for becoming an MFT can vary significantly by location.

Understanding state-specific criteria is crucial. For example, you must meet the Oklahoma City mft education requirements to practice in Oklahoma City. Similarly, students interested in Nebraska should review guidance on how to become an mft in Omaha.

In Florida, individuals must comply with Orlando mft certification requirements before obtaining licensure. Meanwhile, those aiming to practice in Pennsylvania should familiarize themselves with the Philadelphia mft education requirements.

Online psychology degrees can streamline preparation for these paths, offering flexibility and access to accredited programs. No matter where you plan to practice, research local requirements to ensure a smooth transition from education to licensure.

Best Scientists Citing Paul Verhaeghen

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles