Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Citations per year, relative to Gerd Gigerenzer Gerd Gigerenzer (= 1×)
peers
Baruch Fischhoff
Countries citing papers authored by Gerd Gigerenzer
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Gerd Gigerenzer's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Gerd Gigerenzer with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Gerd Gigerenzer more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Gerd Gigerenzer. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Gerd Gigerenzer. The network helps show where Gerd Gigerenzer may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Gerd Gigerenzer
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Gerd Gigerenzer.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Gerd Gigerenzer based on the total number of
citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges
represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together.
Node borders
signify the number of papers an author published with Gerd Gigerenzer. Gerd Gigerenzer is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Gigerenzer, Gerd, Colin Allen, Robert L. Goldstone, et al.. (2025). Alternative models of funding curiosity-driven research. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 122(5). e2401237121–e2401237121.1 indexed citations
Osman, Magda, Björn Meder, Gerd Gigerenzer, et al.. (2012). What Can Cognitive Science Say or Learn about Economic Crises. eScholarship (California Digital Library). 34(34). 48–49.1 indexed citations
Ortmann, Andreas, et al.. (2008). The Recognition Heuristic: A Fast and Frugal Way to Investment Choice?. Max Planck Digital Library. 993–1003.25 indexed citations
14.
Gigerenzer, Gerd. (2007). Helping physicians understand screening tests will improve health care. Max Planck Digital Library. 20(10). 37–38.1 indexed citations
15.
Gigerenzer, Gerd & Christoph Engel. (2006). Heuristics and the Law (Dahlem Workshop Reports). The MIT Press eBooks.4 indexed citations
16.
Gigerenzer, Gerd & Ulrich Hoffrage. (1998). Overcoming Difficulties in Bayesian Reasoning: A Reply to Lewis & Keren and Mellers & McGraw. RePEc: Research Papers in Economics.3 indexed citations
17.
Goldstein, Daniel G. & Gerd Gigerenzer. (1996). Satisficing inference and the perks of ignorance. eScholarship (California Digital Library). 137–141.5 indexed citations
18.
Keul, Alexander, et al.. (1994). Publikationen in internationalen Zeitschriften: Ein Nachwort zur SSCI-Analyse [Publications in international journals: An afterword on the SSCI analysis]. Psychologische Rundschau. 45(2). 111–113.2 indexed citations
19.
Gigerenzer, Gerd. (1988). Woher kommen Theorien über kognitive Prozesse? [Where do theories of cognitive processes come from?]. Psychologische Rundschau. 39(2). 91–100.3 indexed citations
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.