World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Ad J. J. M. Vingerhoets

Ad J. J. M. Vingerhoets

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Psychology 73 1980 1792 112 107 401 17828

Ad J. J. M. Vingerhoets publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Ad J. J. M. Vingerhoets between 1959 and 2021, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Ad J. J. M. Vingerhoets published across 63 years, from 1959 to 2021, averaging 7.1 papers a year. Output peaked at 30 publications in 1998. 16 of the 450 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1959 to 2021. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 30. Peak 30 publications in 1998. 1959: 1 publication 1960: 0 publications 1961: 0 publications 1962: 0 publications 1963: 0 publications 1964: 0 publications 1965: 0 publications 1966: 0 publications 1967: 0 publications 1968: 0 publications 1969: 0 publications 1970: 0 publications 1971: 0 publications 1972: 0 publications 1973: 0 publications 1974: 0 publications 1975: 0 publications 1976: 0 publications 1977: 0 publications 1978: 0 publications 1979: 0 publications 1980: 1 publication 1981: 1 publication 1982: 1 publication 1983: 0 publications 1984: 0 publications 1985: 0 publications 1986: 0 publications 1987: 2 publications 1988: 1 publication 1989: 2 publications 1990: 2 publications 1991: 3 publications 1992: 2 publications 1993: 7 publications 1994: 1 publication 1995: 4 publications 1996: 18 publications 1997: 21 publications 1998: 30 publications 1999: 25 publications 2000: 15 publications 2001: 17 publications 2002: 14 publications 2003: 4 publications 2004: 16 publications 2005: 15 publications 2006: 16 publications 2007: 18 publications 2008: 22 publications 2009: 15 publications 2010: 19 publications 2011: 18 publications 2012: 21 publications 2013: 26 publications 2014: 9 publications 2015: 14 publications 2016: 14 publications 2017: 17 publications 2018: 12 publications 2019: 10 publications 2020: 12 publications 2021: 4 publications
1959 2021

450 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Ad J. J. M. Vingerhoets: publications per year, 1959 to 2021
Year Publications
1959 1
1960 0
1961 0
1962 0
1963 0
1964 0
1965 0
1966 0
1967 0
1968 0
1969 0
1970 0
1971 0
1972 0
1973 0
1974 0
1975 0
1976 0
1977 0
1978 0
1979 0
1980 1
1981 1
1982 1
1983 0
1984 0
1985 0
1986 0
1987 2
1988 1
1989 2
1990 2
1991 3
1992 2
1993 7
1994 1
1995 4
1996 18
1997 21
1998 30
1999 25
2000 15
2001 17
2002 14
2003 4
2004 16
2005 15
2006 16
2007 18
2008 22
2009 15
2010 19
2011 18
2012 21
2013 26
2014 9
2015 14
2016 14
2017 17
2018 12
2019 10
2020 12
2021 4
Total 450
Download as CSV

Ad J. J. M. Vingerhoets 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 Ad J. J. M. Vingerhoets 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, 401–410 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: 401 publications — 94th percentile

94% 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
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 43 401
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

Ad J. J. M. Vingerhoets 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 Ad J. J. M. Vingerhoets 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, 72–73 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: 73 D-Index — 83rd percentile

83% 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
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 73
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

What is he best known for?

The fields of study he is best known for:

  • Internal medicine
  • Social psychology
  • Psychiatry

His scientific interests lie mostly in Social psychology, Developmental psychology, Psychosocial, Quality of life and Breast cancer. His research on Social psychology frequently connects to adjacent areas such as Well-being. His Developmental psychology study combines topics from a wide range of disciplines, such as Stressor, Facial expression, Personality, Cross-cultural studies and Crying.

His Psychosocial research is multidisciplinary, incorporating elements of Confidence interval, Low birth weight, Clinical psychology, Obstetrics and Social support. His Quality of life research integrates issues from Cancer registry, Gynecology and Gerontology. His Breast cancer research is multidisciplinary, incorporating perspectives in Surgery and Disease.

His most cited work include:

  • Quality of life among long-term breast cancer survivors: A systematic review (419 citations)
  • Psychosocial factors and pregnancy outcome: A review with emphasis on methodological issues☆ (320 citations)
  • Quality of life assessment (294 citations)

What are the main themes of his work throughout his whole career to date?

His main research concerns Developmental psychology, Crying, Clinical psychology, Social psychology and Personality. He combines subjects such as Distress, Social support, Mood, Coping and Feeling with his study of Developmental psychology. Social support and Psychosocial are frequently intertwined in his study.

His Crying study incorporates themes from Tears, Affect, Perception and Interpersonal communication. His Social psychology study frequently links to other fields, such as Well-being. His study in Extraversion and introversion and Neuroticism falls under the purview of Personality.

He most often published in these fields:

  • Developmental psychology (32.18%)
  • Crying (24.47%)
  • Clinical psychology (14.10%)

What were the highlights of his more recent work (between 2014-2021)?

  • Crying (24.47%)
  • Developmental psychology (32.18%)
  • Tears (6.65%)

In recent papers he was focusing on the following fields of study:

The scientist’s investigation covers issues in Crying, Developmental psychology, Tears, Social psychology and Clinical psychology. His Crying study also includes fields such as

  • Perception that connect with fields like Anger,
  • Affect which connect with Personality and Distress. His research in Developmental psychology focuses on subjects like Feeling, which are connected to Social support.

His Tears study combines topics in areas such as Young adult and Functional magnetic resonance imaging. His Social psychology research focuses on Active listening and how it connects with Extraversion and introversion and Neuroticism. In his work, Anxiety is strongly intertwined with Mental health, which is a subfield of Clinical psychology.

Between 2014 and 2021, his most popular works were:

  • Nostalgia fosters self-continuity: Uncovering the mechanism (social connectedness) and consequence (eudaimonic well-being). (66 citations)
  • The riddle of human emotional crying : A challenge for emotion researchers (52 citations)
  • Effectiveness of hospital-based video interaction guidance on parental interactive behavior, bonding, and stress after preterm birth: A randomized controlled trial. (36 citations)

In his most recent research, the most cited papers focused on:

  • Internal medicine
  • Social psychology
  • Psychiatry

His primary areas of study are Developmental psychology, Crying, Social psychology, Feeling and Tears. His work on Intrusiveness as part of his general Developmental psychology study is frequently connected to Child health, thereby bridging the divide between different branches of science. His study in Crying is interdisciplinary in nature, drawing from both Distress, Prosocial behavior and Mood.

His study in the fields of Social connectedness, Sadness, Personality and Empathy under the domain of Social psychology overlaps with other disciplines such as Music and emotion. His Feeling research incorporates themes from Gestational age, Parental bonding, Emotional Bonds, Infant newborn and Emotional bonding. In his study, which falls under the umbrella issue of Longitudinal study, Well-being is strongly linked to Clinical psychology.

Best Publications

  • Quality of life among long-term breast cancer survivors: A systematic review

    Floortje Mols;Ad J.J.M. Vingerhoets;Jan Willem Coebergh;Lonneke V. van de Poll-Franse

  • The past makes the present meaningful: nostalgia as an existential resource.

    Clay Routledge;Jamie Arndt;Tim Wildschut;Constantine Sedikides

  • Psychological aspects of in vitro fertilization: a review.

    A Eugster;A.J.J.M Vingerhoets

  • Psychosocial factors and pregnancy outcome: A review with emphasis on methodological issues☆

    K.Marieke Paarlberg;AD J.J.M. Vingerhoets;Jan Passchier;Gustaaf A. Dekker

  • Attachment and well-being: The mediating role of emotion regulation and resilience.

    Annemiek Karreman;Ad J.J.M. Vingerhoets

  • Back to the Future: Nostalgia Increases Optimism

    Wing-Yee Cheung;Tim Wildschut;Constantine Sedikides;Erica G. Hepper

  • Spirituality and well-being in cancer patients: A review

    Anja Visser;Bert Garssen;Ad Vingerhoets

  • The Patient Reported Outcomes Following Initial treatment and Long term Evaluation of Survivorship registry: Scope, rationale and design of an infrastructure for the study of physical and psychosocial outcomes in cancer survivorship cohorts

    Lonneke V. van de Poll-Franse;Nicole Horevoorts;Mies van Eenbergen;Johan Denollet

  • Vacationers Happier, but Most not Happier After a Holiday.

    Jeroen Nawijn;Jeroen Nawijn;Miquelle A. Marchand;Ruut Veenhoven;Ad J. Vingerhoets

  • Well-being, posttraumatic growth and benefit finding in long-term breast cancer survivors

    Floortje Mols;Ad J J M Vingerhoets;Jan Willem W Coebergh;Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse

  • Gender, coping and psychosomatic symptoms

    A. J. J. M. Vingerhoets;G. L. Van Heck

  • Psychosocial predictors of low birthweight: a prospective study.

    K.M. Paarlberg;A.J.J.M. Vingerhoets;J. Passchier;G.A. Dekker

  • Pancultural Nostalgia: Prototypical Conceptions Across Cultures

    Erica G. Hepper;Tim Wildschut;Constantine Sedikides;Timothy D. Ritchie

  • Risk, severity and predictors of physical and psychological morbidity after axillary lymph node dissection for breast cancer.

    J.M.M.A Ververs;R.M.H Roumen;A.J.J.M Vingerhoets;G Vreugdenhil

  • Nostalgia fosters self-continuity: Uncovering the mechanism (social connectedness) and consequence (eudaimonic well-being).

    Constantine Sedikides;Tim Wildschut;Wing-Yee Cheung;Clay Routledge

  • Homesickness: a review of the literature.

    M. A. L. Van Tilburg;A. J. J. M. Vingerhoets;G. L. Van Heck

  • The mnemonic mover: nostalgia regulates avoidance and approach motivation.

    Elena Stephan;Tim Wildschut;Constantine Sedikides;Xinyue Zhou

  • Heartwarming memories: Nostalgia maintains physiological comfort.

    Xinyue Zhou;Tim Wildschut;Constantine Sedikides;Xiaoxi Chen

  • Adult crying : A model and review of the literature

    Ad J. J. M. Vingerhoets;Randolph R. Cornelius;Guus L. Van Heck;Marleen C. Becht

  • Stress and outcome success in IVF: the role of self-reports and endocrine variables

    J.M.J. Smeenk;C.M. Verhaak;A.J.J.M. Vingerhoets;C.G.J. Sweep

  • Emotion regulation and well-being

    Ivan Nyklíček;A. J. J. M. Vingerhoets;Marcel Zeelenberg

Frequent Co-Authors

Ivan Nyklíček
Ivan Nyklíček Tilburg University
Guus L. Van Heck
Guus L. Van Heck Tilburg University
Lauren M. Bylsma
Lauren M. Bylsma University of Pittsburgh
Tim Wildschut
Tim Wildschut University of Southampton
Constantine Sedikides
Constantine Sedikides University of Southampton
Rinie Geenen
Rinie Geenen Utrecht University
Emiel Krahmer
Emiel Krahmer Tilburg University
Johan Denollet
Johan Denollet Tilburg University
Jan Willem Coebergh
Jan Willem Coebergh Erasmus University Rotterdam
Jan Passchier
Jan Passchier Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

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

Choosing to study psychology in the USA opens doors to a diverse range of online degrees and professional opportunities. With the rising demand for mental health professionals, online psychology degrees have become popular options for students looking for flexibility and career advancement.

One of the most common career pathways is becoming a licensed therapist. However, licensure requirements can vary by location. For example, if you are interested in becoming a licensed therapist in Dallas, you must complete specific educational and supervised experience requirements. Similarly, licensed therapist requirements in Denver include passing state-approved exams and obtaining a graduate-level counseling degree.

Those focusing on becoming a licensed therapist in Detroit or becoming a licensed therapist in Durham should also be aware of local regulations regarding clinical experience and state licensure exams. Researching each state’s specific pathway to licensure ensures you meet all requirements and can smoothly transition from student to professional in your chosen area.

Best Scientists Citing Ad J. J. M. Vingerhoets

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles