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 31 11198 10477 540 531 101 3905

Roman Liepelt publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Roman Liepelt between 2005 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Roman Liepelt published across 21 years, from 2005 to 2025, averaging 5.7 papers a year. Output peaked at 18 publications in 2011. 12 of the 119 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2005 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 18. Peak 18 publications in 2011. 2005: 1 publication 2006: 2 publications 2007: 2 publications 2008: 9 publications 2009: 2 publications 2010: 10 publications 2011: 18 publications 2012: 12 publications 2013: 12 publications 2014: 4 publications 2015: 1 publication 2016: 8 publications 2017: 4 publications 2018: 7 publications 2019: 3 publications 2020: 1 publication 2021: 2 publications 2022: 4 publications 2023: 5 publications 2024: 5 publications 2025: 7 publications
2005 2025

119 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Roman Liepelt: publications per year, 2005 to 2025
Year Publications
2005 1
2006 2
2007 2
2008 9
2009 2
2010 10
2011 18
2012 12
2013 12
2014 4
2015 1
2016 8
2017 4
2018 7
2019 3
2020 1
2021 2
2022 4
2023 5
2024 5
2025 7
Total 119
Download as CSV

Roman Liepelt 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 Roman Liepelt 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, 101–110 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: 101 publications — 21st percentile

21% 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
101–110 736 101
111–120 686
121–130 670
131–140 644
141–150 597
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

Roman Liepelt 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 Roman Liepelt 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, 30–31 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: 31 D-Index — 3rd percentile

3% 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 31
32–33 702
34–35 671
36–37 659
38–39 641
40–41 671
42–43 617
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

Roman Liepelt is affiliated with the University of Hagen in Germany. Their research spans neuroscience and psychology, with a focus on cognitive neuroscience, social psychology, neurology, cardiology, and experimental and cognitive psychology.

The scientist's work covers a range of topics, including:

  • Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Vagus Nerve Stimulation Research
  • Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces

Among their recent papers are:

  • Evidence for a modulating effect of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) on salivary alpha-amylase as indirect noradrenergic marker: A pooled mega-analysis, 2022, Brain Stimulation
  • The effect of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) on cognitive control in multitasking, 2023, Neuropsychologia
  • Action prediction modulates self-other integration in joint action, 2022, Psychological Research
  • Perceptual target discriminability modulates the Simon effect beyond the fading of distractor-based activation: Insights from delta plots and diffusion model analyses, 2024, Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance
  • Motor cognition in schizophrenia: Control of automatic imitation and mapping of action context are reduced, 2022, Schizophrenia Research

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Liepelt include:

  • Rico Fischer
  • Aldo Sommer
  • Ruben Ellinghaus
  • Laura Sperl
  • Manon Giraudier

Liepelt's publications frequently appear in the following venues:

  • Psychological Research
  • Brain Stimulation
  • Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
  • Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
  • Neuropsychologia

Their research includes studies in cognitive control, action prediction, neural modulation via non-invasive stimulation, social and experimental psychology, alongside investigations into neurological disorders such as schizophrenia.

Best Publications

  • The joint Simon effect: A review and theoretical integration

    Thomas Dolk;Thomas Dolk;Bernhard Hommel;Lorenza S. Colzato;Simone Schütz-Bosbach

  • The (not so) social Simon effect: a referential coding account.

    Thomas Dolk;Bernhard Hommel;Wolfgang Prinz;Roman Liepelt

  • Through the looking glass: counter‐mirror activation following incompatible sensorimotor learning

    Caroline Catmur;Helge Gillmeister;Helge Gillmeister;Geoffrey Bird;Roman Liepelt

  • When humanoid robots become human-like interaction partners: corepresentation of robotic actions.

    Anna Stenzel;Eris Chinellato;Maria A Tirado Bou;Ángel P Del Pobil

  • How “Social” is the social Simon effect?

    Thomas Dolk;Bernhard Hommel;Lorenza S. Colzato;Simone Schütz-Bosbach

  • Robotic movement preferentially engages the action observation network

    Emily S. Cross;Emily S. Cross;Roman Liepelt;Antonia F. de C. Hamilton;Jim Parkinson

  • What is shared in joint action? Issues of co-representation, response conflict, and agent identification

    Dorit Wenke;Dorit Wenke;Silke Atmaca;Antje Holländer;Roman Liepelt;Roman Liepelt

  • What is matched in direct matching? Intention attribution modulates motor priming.

    Roman Liepelt;D. Yves von Cramon;Marcel Brass

  • Experience-based priming of body parts: A study of action imitation

    Helge Gillmeister;Caroline Catmur;Roman Liepelt;Marcel Brass

  • Task switching: effects of practice on switch and mixing costs

    Tilo Strobach;Tilo Strobach;Roman Liepelt;Torsten Schubert;Torsten Schubert;Andrea Kiesel

  • Top-Down Modulation of Motor Priming by Belief About Animacy

    Roman Liepelt;Marcel Brass

  • Improved intertask coordination after extensive dual-task practice.

    Roman Liepelt;Roman Liepelt;Roman Liepelt;Tilo Strobach;Tilo Strobach;Peter Frensch;Torsten Schubert;Torsten Schubert

  • Rethinking ‘rational imitation’ in 14-month-old infants: a perceptual distraction approach

    Miriam Beisert;Norbert Zmyj;Roman Liepelt;Franziska Jung

  • How do we infer others' goals from non-stereotypic actions? The outcome of context-sensitive inferential processing in right inferior parietal and posterior temporal cortex

    Roman Liepelt;D. Yves von Cramon;Marcel Brass

  • The Virtual Co-Actor: The Social Simon Effect does not Rely on Online Feedback from the Other.

    Elize Vlainic;Roman Liepelt;Lorenza S. Colzato;Wolfgang Prinz

  • Trial-to-trial sequential dependencies in a social and non-social Simon task

    Roman Liepelt;Dorit Wenke;Dorit Wenke;Rico Fischer;Wolfgang Prinz

  • When Do We Simulate Non-Human Agents? Dissociating Communicative and Non-Communicative Actions.

    Roman Liepelt;Wolfgang Prinz;Marcel Brass

  • The shaping of social perception by stimulus and knowledge cues to human animacy

    Emily S. Cross;Emily S. Cross;Richard Ramsey;Roman Liepelt;Wolfgang Prinz

  • Effects of extensive dual-task practice on processing stages in simultaneous choice tasks

    Tilo Strobach;Tilo Strobach;Roman Liepelt;Harold Pashler;Peter A. Frensch

  • Processing of fair and unfair offers in the ultimatum game under social observation

    Jutta Peterburs;Rolf Voegler;Roman Liepelt;Anna Schulze

  • What Is Matched in Direct Matching? Intention Attribution Modulates

    Roman Liepelt;D. Yves Von Cramon;Marcel Brass;Max Planck

Frequent Co-Authors

Wolfgang Prinz
Wolfgang Prinz Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences
Bernhard Hommel
Bernhard Hommel Shandong Normal University
Marcel Brass
Marcel Brass Ghent University
Torsten Schubert
Torsten Schubert Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg
Rico Fischer
Rico Fischer University of Greifswald
Emily S. Cross
Emily S. Cross University of Glasgow
Markus Lappe
Markus Lappe University of Münster
Markus Raab
Markus Raab German Sport University Cologne
D. Yves von Cramon
D. Yves von Cramon Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences

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

Exploring a career in psychology opens the door to multiple online degree options, including bachelor's, master's, and doctoral programs. Many students interested in direct counseling or therapy roles choose pathways that lead to professional licensure. It’s important to know that requirements can differ by state and city, impacting the courses you take and the internships you complete.

Those pursuing licensure should first review specific jurisdictional guidelines. For example, Tampa licensed therapist education requirements highlight the importance of supervised clinical hours, while the licensed therapist requirements in Toledo emphasize both educational credentials and state exams.

In the Southwest, Tucson licensed therapist requirements detail local certifications and background checks. Meanwhile, the licensed therapist requirements in Tulsa reflect Oklahoma’s focus on continuing education post-licensure.

Whichever pathway you choose, earning an online psychology degree can be a flexible option, but always ensure your program aligns with the licensing standards in your intended area of practice.

Best Scientists Citing Roman Liepelt

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles