World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
30
Citations
4737
World Ranking
11331
National Ranking
1099

Sam Wass 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 Sam Wass 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: 152 publications — 50th percentile

50% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Sam Wass 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 Sam Wass 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: 30 D-Index — 1st percentile

1% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more.

Best Publications

  • Distortions and disconnections: disrupted brain connectivity in autism.

    Sam Wass

  • Training attentional control and working memory - Is younger, better?

    Sam Wass;G. Scerif;Mark H. Johnson

  • Speaker gaze increases information coupling between infant and adult brains.

    Victoria Vik Leong;Victoria Vik Leong;Elizabeth Byrne;Kaili Clackson;Stanimira Georgieva

  • Training attentional control in infancy.

    Sam Wass;Kaska Porayska-Pomsta;Mark H. Johnson

  • Developing technology for autism: an interdisciplinary approach

    K. Porayska-Pomsta;C. Frauenberger;H. Pain;G. Rajendran

  • Parsing eye-tracking data of variable quality to provide accurate fixation duration estimates in infants and adults.

    Sam Wass;Tim J. Smith;Mark H. Johnson

  • Robustness and Precision : How Data Quality May Influence Key Dependent Variables in Infant Eye-Tracker Analyses

    Sam V. Wass;Linda Forssman;Jukka Leppänen

  • Interpersonal Neural Entrainment during Early Social Interaction

    Sam V. Wass;M. Whitehorn;I. Marriott Haresign;E. Phillips

  • The uses of cognitive training technologies in the treatment of autism spectrum disorders

    Sam V Wass;Kaska Porayska-Pomsta

  • Parental neural responsivity to infants' visual attention: How mature brains influence immature brains during social interaction.

    Sam Wass;Valdas Noreika;Stanimira Georgieva;Kaili Clackson

  • Multimodal hyperscanning reveals that synchrony of body and mind are distinct in mother-child dyads

    Unknown

  • Individual Differences in Infant Oculomotor Behavior During the Viewing of Complex Naturalistic Scenes.

    Sam V. Wass;Tim J. Smith

  • Emotional valence modulates the topology of the parent-infant inter-brain network.

    Lorena Santamaria;Valdas Noreika;Stanimira Georgieva;Kaili Clackson

  • Shorter spontaneous fixation durations in infants with later emerging autism.

    Sam V. Wass;Emily J. H. Jones;Teodora Gliga;Tim J. Smith

  • Applying cognitive training to target executive functions during early development

    Sam V. Wass

  • Research Review: Do parent ratings of infant negative emotionality and self-regulation predict psychopathology in childhood and adolescence? A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective longitudinal studies.

    Katarzyna Kostyrka‐Allchorne;Sam V. Wass;Edmund J. S. Sonuga‐Barke;Edmund J. S. Sonuga‐Barke

  • Blending Human and Artificial Intelligence to Support Autistic Children’s Social Communication Skills

    Kaśka Porayska-Pomsta;Alyssa M. Alcorn;Katerina Avramides;Sandra Beale

  • Widely applicable MATLAB routines for automated analysis of saccadic reaction times.

    Jukka M. Leppänen;Linda Forssman;Jussi Kaatiala;Santeri Yrttiaho

  • 14 challenges and their solutions for conducting social neuroscience and longitudinal EEG research with infants.

    Valdas Noreika;Stanimira Georgieva;Sam Wass;Victoria Leong

  • Parents Mimic and Influence Their Infant's Autonomic State through Dynamic Affective State Matching.

    Samuel Vincent Wass;Celia Grace Smith;Kaili Clackson;Caitlin Gibb

Frequent Co-Authors

Mark H. Johnson
Mark H. Johnson University of Cambridge
Emily J.H. Jones
Emily J.H. Jones Birkbeck, University of London
Tim J. Smith
Tim J. Smith Birkbeck, University of London
Edmund J.S. Sonuga-Barke
Edmund J.S. Sonuga-Barke King's College London
Tony Charman
Tony Charman King's College London
Jukka M. Leppänen
Jukka M. Leppänen University of Turku
Susan A. Rose
Susan A. Rose Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Andrew Pickles
Andrew Pickles King's College London
Kerstin Konrad
Kerstin Konrad RWTH Aachen University
Judith F. Feldman
Judith F. Feldman Columbia 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:

Best Scientists Citing Sam Wass

Recently Published Articles