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 36 9531 8913 5047 4602 73 5321

Amanda M. VanDerHeyden publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Amanda M. VanDerHeyden between 2000 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Amanda M. VanDerHeyden published across 26 years, from 2000 to 2025, averaging 3 papers a year. Output peaked at 8 publications in 2007. 3 of the 77 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
2 4 6 8
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2000 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 8. Peak 8 publications in 2007. 2000: 1 publication 2001: 5 publications 2002: 2 publications 2003: 2 publications 2004: 3 publications 2005: 6 publications 2006: 7 publications 2007: 8 publications 2008: 2 publications 2009: 3 publications 2010: 2 publications 2011: 3 publications 2012: 2 publications 2013: 3 publications 2014: 0 publications 2015: 1 publication 2016: 6 publications 2017: 3 publications 2018: 3 publications 2019: 0 publications 2020: 4 publications 2021: 3 publications 2022: 2 publications 2023: 3 publications 2024: 2 publications 2025: 1 publication
2000 2025

77 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Amanda M. VanDerHeyden: publications per year, 2000 to 2025
Year Publications
2000 1
2001 5
2002 2
2003 2
2004 3
2005 6
2006 7
2007 8
2008 2
2009 3
2010 2
2011 3
2012 2
2013 3
2014 0
2015 1
2016 6
2017 3
2018 3
2019 0
2020 4
2021 3
2022 2
2023 3
2024 2
2025 1
Total 77
Download as CSV

Amanda M. VanDerHeyden 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 Amanda M. VanDerHeyden 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, 71–80 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: 73 publications — 5th percentile

5% 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 73
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
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

Amanda M. VanDerHeyden 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 Amanda M. VanDerHeyden 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, 36–37 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: 36 D-Index — 19th percentile

19% 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 36
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
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

Amanda M. VanDerHeyden is affiliated with the University of California, Santa Barbara in the United States. Their research primarily spans the fields of Psychology and Social Sciences, with a particular focus on Developmental and Educational Psychology.

Their work addresses various subfields including:

  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Statistics and Probability
  • Education
  • Safety Research
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Key research topics Amanda M. VanDerHeyden has contributed to include:

  • Reading and Literacy Development
  • Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
  • Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Disability Education and Employment
  • Writing and Handwriting Education
  • Education Practices and Challenges
  • Educational Assessment and Improvement

Some recent notable papers by VanDerHeyden include:

  • "Elementary school teachers' perceptions of curriculum-based measures of written expression", 2020, published in Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst)
  • "A cost-effectiveness analysis of classwide math intervention", 2020, Journal of School Psychology
  • "Comparing the Cost-Accuracy Ratios of Multiple Approaches to Reading Screening in Elementary Schools", 2023, Remedial and Special Education
  • "Decision Accuracy of Commonly Used Dyslexia Screeners Among Students Who Are Potentially at Risk for Reading Difficulties", 2022, Learning Disability Quarterly
  • "At What Cost?: Introduction to the Special Issue "Return on Investment for Academic and Behavioral Assessment and Intervention"", 2020, School Psychology Review

VanDerHeyden has frequently collaborated with several coauthors, including:

  • Courtenay A. Barrett
  • Matthew K. Burns
  • Benjamin G. Solomon
  • Robin S. Codding
  • Kristin A. Gansle

Their publications commonly appear in these venues:

  • Remedial and Special Education
  • Scholarworks (University of Massachusetts Amherst)
  • Learning Disability Quarterly
  • Journal of School Psychology
  • School Psychology Review

Best Publications

  • A Multi-Year Evaluation of the Effects of a Response to Intervention (RTI) Model on Identification of Children for Special Education.

    Amanda M. VanDerHeyden;Joseph C. Witt;Donna Gilbertson

  • Handbook of response to intervention : the science and practice of assessment and intervention

    Shane R. Jimerson;Matthew K. Burns;Amanda M. VanDerHeyden

  • Moving Beyond Total Words Written: The Reliability, Criterion Validity, and Time Cost of Alternate Measures for Curriculum-Based Measurement in Writing

    Kristin A. Gansle;George H. Noell;Amanda M. VanDerHeyden;Gale M. Naquin

  • Handbook of response to intervention : the science and practice of multi-tiered systems of support

    Shane R. Jimerson;Matthew K. Burns;Amanda M. VanDerHeyden

  • Development and Validation of a Process for Screening Referrals to Special Education.

    Amanda M. VanDerHeyden;Joseph C. Witt;Gale Naquin

  • Evaluation of the Technical Adequacy of Three Methods for Identifying Specific Learning Disabilities Based on Cognitive Discrepancies.

    Karla K. Stuebing;Jack M. Fletcher;Lee Branum-Martin;David J. Francis

  • The Emergence and Possible Futures of Response to Intervention.

    Amanda M. VanDerHeyden;Joseph C. Witt;David W. Barnett

  • Assessing the Instructional Level for Mathematics: A Comparison of Methods.

    Matthew K. Burns;Amanda M. VanDerHeyden;Cynthia L. Jiban

  • The Reliability and Validity of Curriculum-Based Measurement Readiness Probes for Kindergarten Students.

    Amanda M. Vanderheyden;Joseph C. Witt;Gale Naquin;George Noell

  • Using Curriculum-Based Assessment and Curriculum-Based Measurement to Guide Elementary Mathematics Instruction: Effect on Individual and Group Accountability Scores.

    Amanda M. VanDerHeyden;Matthew K. Burns

  • Handbook of response to intervention

    Shane R. Jimerson;Matthew K. Burns;Amanda M. VanDerHeyden

  • Troubleshooting Behavioral Interventions: A Systematic Process for Finding and Eliminating Problems

    Joseph C. Witt;Amanda M. VanDerHeyden;Donna Gilbertson

  • Supporting teacher use of interventions: effects of response dependent performance feedback on teacher implementation of a math intervention

    Donna Gilbertson;Joseph C. Witt;Lynn LaFleur Singletary;Amanda VanDerHeyden

  • Integrating Frameworks From Early Childhood Intervention and School Psychology to Accelerate Growth for All Young Children

    Amanda M. VanDerHeyden;Patricia Snyder

  • Handbook of Response to Intervention: The Science and Practice of Multi-Tiered Systems of Support: Second Edition

    Shane R. Jimerson;Matthew K. Burns;Amanda M. VanDerHeyden

  • Technical Adequacy of Response to Intervention Decisions

    Amanda M. Vanderheyden

  • Response to Intervention at School: The Science and Practice of Assessment and Intervention

    Shane R. Jimerson;Matthew K. Burns;Amanda M. VanDerHeyden

  • The Technical Adequacy of Curriculum-Based and Rating-Based Measures of Written Expression for Elementary School Students.

    Kristin A. Gansle;Amanda M. VanDerHeyden;George H. Noell;Jennifer L. Resetar

  • The Rti Approach to Evaluating Learning Disabilities

    Joseph F. Kovaleski;Amanda M. VanDerHeyden;Edward S. Shapiro

  • Measuring Response to Early Literacy Intervention with Preschoolers at Risk.

    Amanda M. VanDerHeyden;Patricia A. Snyder;Carmen Broussard;Kerrie Ramsdell

  • Elementary school teachers' perceptions of curriculum-based measures of written expression

    Kristin A. Gansle;Donna N. Gilbertson;Amanda M. VanDerHeyden

Frequent Co-Authors

Matthew K. Burns
Matthew K. Burns University of Missouri
Joseph C. Witt
Joseph C. Witt Louisiana State University
George H. Noell
George H. Noell Louisiana State University
Shane R. Jimerson
Shane R. Jimerson University of California, Santa Barbara
Patricia Snyder
Patricia Snyder University of Florida
Stanley L. Deno
Stanley L. Deno University of Minnesota
James Algina
James Algina University of Florida
Henry S. Roane
Henry S. Roane SUNY Upstate Medical 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:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

Exploring online psychology degrees can open various career doors, from counseling to human resources and beyond. One of the main considerations for prospective students is cost. Many universities throughout the U.S. now offer affordable online programs, making quality education more accessible than ever.

For those considering regional options, you can find affordable psychology programs in Louisville, as well as the cheapest psychology programs in Minneapolis. Students in Missouri can benefit from affordable psychology degrees in Missouri, while those in the Southeast have access to affordable psychology degrees in North Carolina.

These affordable options can alleviate financial stress while still providing the necessary skills and credentials to advance in a psychology-related field. With a growing demand for mental health professionals and specialists in areas like organizational psychology, graduates have diverse pathways to explore. Researching programs and career outcomes will help you choose the best option for your goals and budget.

Best Scientists Citing Amanda M. VanDerHeyden

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles