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 62 3169 2916 1797 1615 95 34509

Adam M. Grant publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Adam M. Grant between 2004 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Adam M. Grant published across 22 years, from 2004 to 2025, averaging 5.1 papers a year. Output peaked at 14 publications in 2011. 2 of the 112 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2004 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 14. Peak 14 publications in 2011. 2004: 2 publications 2005: 2 publications 2006: 2 publications 2007: 8 publications 2008: 8 publications 2009: 9 publications 2010: 9 publications 2011: 14 publications 2012: 10 publications 2013: 12 publications 2014: 7 publications 2015: 2 publications 2016: 5 publications 2017: 5 publications 2018: 2 publications 2019: 3 publications 2020: 0 publications 2021: 5 publications 2022: 4 publications 2023: 1 publication 2024: 0 publications 2025: 2 publications
2004 2025

112 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Adam M. Grant: publications per year, 2004 to 2025
Year Publications
2004 2
2005 2
2006 2
2007 8
2008 8
2009 9
2010 9
2011 14
2012 10
2013 12
2014 7
2015 2
2016 5
2017 5
2018 2
2019 3
2020 0
2021 5
2022 4
2023 1
2024 0
2025 2
Total 112
Download as CSV

Adam M. Grant publications per year - data summary

  • Adam M. Grant, a Psychology scholar from University of Pennsylvania, has 112 publications recorded across 22 years, from 2004 to 2025.
  • The oldest publication on record dates to 2004 and the most recent to 2025.
  • The most productive year is 2011, with 14 publications.
  • The least productive year with any output is 2023, with 1 publication.
  • 2 of the 22 years in the span carry no publications at all (2020 and 2024).
  • The rate of publication averages 5.1 papers per year over the whole span, or 5.6 per year counting only the 20 years with at least one publication.
  • The last 5 years on the chart (2021-2025) hold 12 publications, 11% of the career total.
  • Split into equal eras - 2004-2011: 54 publications (6.8 per year); 2012-2019: 46 publications (5.8 per year); 2020-2025: 12 publications (2.0 per year).
  • Comparing the opening and closing eras, the overall trend of publication is declining.

Adam M. Grant 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 Adam M. Grant 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, 91–100 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: 95 publications — 17th percentile

17% 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 95
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
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

Adam M. Grant publication distribution in Psychology in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the publication count of all 11,416 Psychology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 69 ranges running from 31–40 to 705+ publications.
  • Adam M. Grant, a Psychology scholar from University of Pennsylvania, records 95 publications - the 17th percentile of the discipline.
  • 17% of ranked Psychology scientists score the same or lower than Adam M. Grant, and about 83% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 151–160 publications range, and Adam M. Grant ranks below the median.
  • The most crowded range is 101–110 publications, holding 736 scientists (6% of the field).
  • 72% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 201–210 publications), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 705 publications or more, 100 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

Adam M. Grant 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 Adam M. Grant 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, 62–63 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: 62 D-Index — 72nd percentile

72% 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 62
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

Adam M. Grant D-index placement in Psychology in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the discipline H-index (D-index) of all 11,416 Psychology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 58 ranges running from 30–31 to 144+ D-Index.
  • Adam M. Grant, a Psychology scholar from University of Pennsylvania, records 62 D-Index - the 72nd percentile of the discipline.
  • 72% of ranked Psychology scientists score the same or lower than Adam M. Grant, and about 28% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 48–49 D-Index range, and Adam M. Grant ranks above the median.
  • The most crowded range is 32–33 D-Index, holding 702 scientists (6% of the field).
  • 68% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 58–59 D-Index), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more, 98 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

Overview

Adam M. Grant is affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania in the United States. Their research primarily spans the field of psychology, with a focus on subfields including sociology and political science, experimental and cognitive psychology, social psychology, organizational behavior and human resource management, and applied psychology.

The topics covered in their work include job satisfaction and organizational behavior, social and intergroup psychology, perfectionism, procrastination, anxiety studies, creativity in education and neuroscience, mind wandering and attention, behavioral health and interventions, as well as team dynamics and performance.

Recent papers involving or authored by Adam M. Grant include:

  • "When Putting Work Off Pays Off: The Curvilinear Relationship between Procrastination and Creativity," 2020, Academy of Management Journal
  • "Social Motivation at Work: The Organizational Psychology of Effort for, Against, and with Others," 2021, Annual Review of Psychology
  • "Taking Your Team Behind the Curtain: The Effects of Leader Feedback-Sharing and Feedback-Seeking on Team Psychological Safety," 2021, Organization Science
  • "Getting unstuck: The effects of growth mindsets about the self and job on happiness at work," 2022, Journal of Applied Psychology
  • "Help (Un)wanted: Why the most powerful allies are the most likely to stumble - and when they fulfill their potential," 2022, Research in Organizational Behavior

Frequent coauthors collaborating with Adam M. Grant include Marissa Shandell, Susan J. Ashford, Jihae Shin, Marissa S. Shandell, and Constantinos G. V. Coutifaris.

The scientist's work is frequently published in venues such as the Academy of Management Proceedings, Academy of Management Journal, Annual Review of Psychology, Organization Science, and Journal of Applied Psychology. The number of publications in these venues ranges from one to three in the case of the Academy of Management Proceedings.

Best Publications

  • The dynamics of proactivity at work

    Adam M. Grant;Susan J. Ashford

  • Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity.

    Adam M. Grant

  • Relational Job Design and the Motivation to Make a Prosocial Difference

    Adam M. Grant

  • The Necessity of Others is The Mother of Invention: Intrinsic and Prosocial Motivations, Perspective Taking, and Creativity

    Adam M. Grant;James W. Berry

  • A Socially Embedded Model of Thriving at Work

    Gretchen Spreitzer;Kathleen Sutcliffe;Jane Dutton;Scott Sonenshein

  • The significance of task significance: Job performance effects, relational mechanisms, and boundary conditions.

    Adam M. Grant

  • A little thanks goes a long way: Explaining why gratitude expressions motivate prosocial behavior.

    Adam M. Grant;Francesca Gino

  • Happiness, Health, or Relationships? Managerial Practices and Employee Well-Being Tradeoffs

    Adam M. Grant;Marlys K. Christianson;Richard H. Price

  • When Callings Are Calling: Crafting Work and Leisure in Pursuit of Unanswered Occupational Callings

    Justin M. Berg;Adam M. Grant;Victoria Johnson

  • Leading with Meaning: Beneficiary Contact, Prosocial Impact, and the Performance Effects of Transformational Leadership

    Adam M. Grant

  • Good soldiers and good actors: Prosocial and impression management motives as interactive predictors of affiliative citizenship behaviors.

    Adam M. Grant;David M. Mayer

  • Password memorability and security: empirical results

    J. Yan;A. Blackwell;R. Anderson;A. Grant

  • Too Much of a Good Thing The Challenge and Opportunity of the Inverted U

    Adam M. Grant;Barry Schwartz

  • GETTING CREDIT FOR PROACTIVE BEHAVIOR:SUPERVISOR REACTIONS DEPEND ON WHAT YOU VALUE AND HOW YOU FEEL

    Adam M. Grant;Sharon Parker;Catherine Collins

  • GIVING COMMITMENT: EMPLOYEE SUPPORT PROGRAMS AND THE PROSOCIAL SENSEMAKING PROCESS

    Adam M. Grant;Jane E. Dutton;Brent D. Rosso

  • Reversing the Extraverted Leadership Advantage: The Role of Employee Proactivity

    Adam M. Grant;Francesca Gino;David A. Hofmann

  • Impact and the art of motivation maintenance : The effects of contact with beneficiaries on persistence behavior

    Adam M. Grant;Elizabeth M. Campbell;Grace Chen;Keenan Cottone

  • Meaningful Work: Connecting Business Ethics and Organization Studies

    Christopher Michaelson;Michael G. Pratt;Adam M. Grant;Craig P. Dunn

  • Mission possible? The performance of prosocially motivated employees depends on manager trustworthiness.

    Adam M. Grant;John J. Sumanth

  • Giving Time, Time After Time: Work Design and Sustained Employee Participation in Corporate Volunteering

    Adam M. Grant

Frequent Co-Authors

David A. Hofmann
David A. Hofmann University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Francesca Gino
Francesca Gino Harvard University
Jane E. Dutton
Jane E. Dutton University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Susan J. Ashford
Susan J. Ashford University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Yitzhak Fried
Yitzhak Fried Texas Tech University
Sharon K. Parker
Sharon K. Parker Curtin University
Kathleen M. Sutcliffe
Kathleen M. Sutcliffe Johns Hopkins University
Michael Frese
Michael Frese Asia School of Business
Sabine Sonnentag
Sabine Sonnentag University of Mannheim
Gretchen M. Spreitzer
Gretchen M. Spreitzer University of Michigan–Ann Arbor

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 psychology in the USA opens doors to diverse online degrees and rewarding career pathways. One fast-growing field is applied behavior analysis (ABA), and pursuing this specialization can lead to roles like Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA). Students often wonder about specific certification steps required in different locations.

For instance, if you are interested in how to become a bcba in Chicago, you'll need to complete a graduate-level ABA program, gain supervised experience, and pass the national certification exam. Each city may have unique requirements. Learning about Chula Vista bcba requirements can help you better understand California-specific guidelines, including background checks and state license policies.

Similarly, those focused on how to become a bcba in Cincinnati or becoming a bcba in Cleveland will want to research local opportunities for practica, mentorship, and job placements. Many universities offer online master's degrees in psychology and ABA, allowing you to meet educational requirements from anywhere in the country.

As telehealth and virtual education options expand, online psychology degrees make it easier than ever to pursue specialized credentials and flexible career paths in behavioral and mental health services.

Best Scientists Citing Adam M. Grant

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles