Jan Crusius

3.8k total citations · 2 hit papers
34 papers, 2.2k citations indexed

About

Jan Crusius is a scholar working on Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science and Cognitive Neuroscience. According to data from OpenAlex, Jan Crusius has authored 34 papers receiving a total of 2.2k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 22 papers in Social Psychology, 14 papers in Sociology and Political Science and 10 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience. Recurrent topics in Jan Crusius's work include Emotions and Moral Behavior (11 papers), Social and Intergroup Psychology (7 papers) and Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (7 papers). Jan Crusius is often cited by papers focused on Emotions and Moral Behavior (11 papers), Social and Intergroup Psychology (7 papers) and Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment (7 papers). Jan Crusius collaborates with scholars based in Germany, Netherlands and United States. Jan Crusius's co-authors include Jens Lange, Helmut Appel, Alexander L. Gerlach, Thomas Mussweiler, Katja Corcoran, Aaron C. Weidman, Birk Hagemeyer, Joris Lammers, Anne Gast and Delroy L. Paulhus and has published in prestigious journals such as Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology and Cognition.

In The Last Decade

Jan Crusius

31 papers receiving 2.1k citations

Hit Papers

The interplay between Facebook use, social comparison, en... 2014 2026 2018 2022 2015 2014 100 200 300

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Jan Crusius Germany 18 1.0k 996 591 333 328 34 2.2k
Kenneth G. DeMarree United States 26 1.1k 1.1× 1.1k 1.1× 520 0.9× 413 1.2× 335 1.0× 62 2.3k
Niels van de Ven Netherlands 23 1.3k 1.2× 1.0k 1.0× 532 0.9× 309 0.9× 605 1.8× 45 2.7k
Claire M. Hart United Kingdom 20 909 0.9× 730 0.7× 521 0.9× 245 0.7× 184 0.6× 34 1.8k
R. Matthew Montoya United States 19 857 0.8× 953 1.0× 326 0.6× 504 1.5× 274 0.8× 36 1.9k
Cynthia L. Pickett United States 17 1.5k 1.5× 1.0k 1.0× 464 0.8× 322 1.0× 312 1.0× 21 2.2k
Mitchell J. Callan United Kingdom 24 1.0k 1.0× 1.3k 1.3× 510 0.9× 266 0.8× 739 2.3× 58 2.6k
Roos Vonk Netherlands 25 1.2k 1.2× 958 1.0× 878 1.5× 601 1.8× 453 1.4× 55 2.6k
Marc‐André Reinhard Germany 22 783 0.7× 726 0.7× 408 0.7× 271 0.8× 279 0.9× 109 1.7k
Seger M. Breugelmans Netherlands 28 1.9k 1.8× 1.3k 1.3× 545 0.9× 394 1.2× 766 2.3× 63 3.3k
Robert S. Horton United States 14 729 0.7× 758 0.8× 435 0.7× 403 1.2× 171 0.5× 20 1.7k

Countries citing papers authored by Jan Crusius

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Jan Crusius'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 Jan Crusius with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jan Crusius more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Jan Crusius

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jan Crusius. 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 Jan Crusius. The network helps show where Jan Crusius may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jan Crusius

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jan Crusius. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jan Crusius 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 Jan Crusius. Jan Crusius is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Crusius, Jan, et al.. (2026). Commentary to Kaiser and Wilson (2026). European Psychologist. 31(1). 44–45.
2.
Kerwer, Martin, Jürgen Barth, Jan Crusius, et al.. (2024). KLARpsy-Richtlinie zum Verfassen allgemeinverständlicher Zusammenfassungen psychologischer Metaanalysen im deutschsprachigen Raum. Psychologische Rundschau. 75(3). 234–235.
3.
Lammers, Joris & Jan Crusius. (2024). Teaching simple heuristics can reduce the exponential growth bias in judging historic CO2 emission growth. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy. 24(2). 567–584. 1 indexed citations
4.
König, Laura M, et al.. (2024). How to Communicate Science to the Public?. Zeitschrift für Psychologie. 233(1). 40–51. 3 indexed citations
5.
6.
Unkelbach, Christian, Hans Alves, Matthew Baldwin, et al.. (2023). Relativity in Social Cognition: Basic processes and novel applications of social comparisons. European Review of Social Psychology. 34(2). 387–440. 17 indexed citations
7.
Genschow, Oliver, et al.. (2021). A direct test of the similarity assumption — Focusing on differences as compared with similarities decreases automatic imitation. Cognition. 215. 104824–104824. 7 indexed citations
8.
Crusius, Jan, et al.. (2021). Imitation and interindividual differences: Belief in free will is not related to automatic imitation. Acta Psychologica. 219. 103374–103374. 3 indexed citations
9.
Genschow, Oliver, et al.. (2021). Group membership does not modulate automatic imitation. Psychological Research. 86(3). 780–791. 8 indexed citations
10.
Lammers, Joris, Jan Crusius, & Anne Gast. (2020). Correcting misperceptions of exponential coronavirus growth increases support for social distancing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 117(28). 16264–16266. 87 indexed citations
11.
Crusius, Jan & Jens Lange. (2020). Counterfactual thoughts distinguish benign and malicious envy.. Emotion. 21(5). 905–920. 13 indexed citations
12.
Genschow, Oliver, et al.. (2020). Does social psychology persist over half a century? A direct replication of Cialdini et al.’s (1975) classic door-in-the-face technique.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 120(2). e1–e7. 15 indexed citations
13.
Crusius, Jan, Manuel F. Gonzalez, Jens Lange, & Yochi Cohen‐Charash. (2019). Envy: An Adversarial Review and Comparison of Two Competing Views. Emotion Review. 12(1). 3–21. 66 indexed citations
14.
Lange, Jens, Delroy L. Paulhus, & Jan Crusius. (2017). Elucidating the Dark Side of Envy: Distinctive Links of Benign and Malicious Envy With Dark Personalities. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 44(4). 601–614. 75 indexed citations
15.
Lange, Jens, Jan Crusius, & Birk Hagemeyer. (2016). The Evil Queen's Dilemma: Linking Narcissistic Admiration and Rivalry to Benign and Malicious Envy. European Journal of Personality. 30(2). 168–188. 132 indexed citations
16.
Lange, Jens & Jan Crusius. (2014). Dispositional Envy Revisited. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 41(2). 284–294. 308 indexed citations breakdown →
17.
Crusius, Jan & Thomas Mussweiler. (2011). When people want what others have: The impulsive side of envious desire.. Emotion. 12(1). 142–153. 106 indexed citations
18.
Rose, Matthias, Inka Wahl, Jan Crusius, & Bernd Löwe. (2010). Psychische Komorbidität. Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz. 54(1). 83–89. 8 indexed citations
19.
Crusius, Jan, et al.. (2009). When I and me are different: assimilation and contrast in temporal self‐comparisons. European Journal of Social Psychology. 40(1). 160–168. 25 indexed citations
20.
Martin, Alan J., et al.. (2003). Field-Scale Assessment of Bioremediation Strategies for Two Pit Lakes Using Limnocorrals. University of Alberta Library. 14 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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026