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 40 8181 7637 4383 3989 106 7695

Anna M. Bardone-Cone publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Anna M. Bardone-Cone between 2005 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Anna M. Bardone-Cone published across 21 years, from 2005 to 2025, averaging 5.8 papers a year. Output peaked at 10 publications in 2021. 10 of the 122 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
2 4 6 8 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2005 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 10. Peak 10 publications in 2021. 2005: 4 publications 2006: 3 publications 2007: 5 publications 2008: 4 publications 2009: 3 publications 2010: 4 publications 2011: 5 publications 2012: 9 publications 2013: 8 publications 2014: 6 publications 2015: 4 publications 2016: 9 publications 2017: 7 publications 2018: 2 publications 2019: 8 publications 2020: 6 publications 2021: 10 publications 2022: 7 publications 2023: 8 publications 2024: 1 publication 2025: 9 publications
2005 2025

122 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Anna M. Bardone-Cone: publications per year, 2005 to 2025
Year Publications
2005 4
2006 3
2007 5
2008 4
2009 3
2010 4
2011 5
2012 9
2013 8
2014 6
2015 4
2016 9
2017 7
2018 2
2019 8
2020 6
2021 10
2022 7
2023 8
2024 1
2025 9
Total 122
Download as CSV

Anna M. Bardone-Cone 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 Anna M. Bardone-Cone 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, 101–110 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: 106 publications — 24th percentile

24% 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
101–110 736 106
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

Anna M. Bardone-Cone 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 Anna M. Bardone-Cone 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, 40–41 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: 40 D-Index — 30th percentile

30% 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 40
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

Anna M. Bardone-Cone is affiliated with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in the United States. Their research contributions are concentrated primarily within the field of Psychology, with a strong emphasis on Clinical Psychology. Their work extensively addresses eating disorders and related behavioral and psychological health issues.

Their publication record reveals a focus on topics related to eating disorders and behaviors, body image and dysmorphia studies, obesity, physical activity, and diet. They also engage in research concerning the impact of technology on adolescents, obsessive-compulsive spectrum disorders, obesity and health practices, and menstrual health and disorders.

Frequent publication venues for their work include UNC Libraries, Eating Behaviors, International Journal of Eating Disorders, as well as Eating and Weight Disorders - Studies on Anorexia Bulimia and Obesity, and Body Image. These journals reflect the recurring themes of their research on disordered eating patterns and body image concerns.

Among their recent papers are:

  • "Does the tripartite influence model of body image and eating pathology function similarly across racial/ethnic groups of White, Black, Latina, and Asian women?" (2021, Eating Behaviors)
  • "Comparing eating disorder characteristics and treatment in self-identified competitive athletes and non-athletes from the National Eating Disorders Association online screening tool" (2020, International Journal of Eating Disorders)
  • "Body appreciation and intuitive eating in eating disorder recovery" (2020, International Journal of Eating Disorders)
  • "Subjective binge eating: a marker of disordered eating and broader psychological distress" (2020, Eating and Weight Disorders - Studies on Anorexia Bulimia and Obesity)
  • "Impulsivity and anxiety-related dimensions in adults with bulimic-spectrum disorders differentially relate to eating disordered behaviors" (2020, Eating Behaviors)

Bardone-Cone collaborates frequently with several researchers, including Ellen E. Fitzsimmons-Craft, Katherine A. Thompson, Stephen A. Wonderlich, Ross D. Crosby, and Cynthia M. Bulik. These collaborations underline a connected research network centered on clinical and behavioral aspects of eating disorders.

Best Publications

  • Perfectionism and eating disorders: current status and future directions.

    Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Stephen A. Wonderlich;Randy O. Frost;Cynthia M. Bulik

  • Development and validation of the Sociocultural Attitudes Towards Appearance Questionnaire-4 (SATAQ-4).

    Lauren M. Schaefer;Natasha L. Burke;J. Kevin Thompson;Robert F. Dedrick

  • Psychometric properties of the eating disorder examination-questionnaire: factor structure and internal consistency.

    Carol B. Peterson;Ross D. Crosby;Stephen A. Wonderlich;Thomas Joiner

  • Defining recovery from an eating disorder: Conceptualization, validation, and examination of psychosocial functioning and psychiatric comorbidity

    Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Megan B. Harney;Christine R. Maldonado;Melissa A. Lawson

  • What does viewing a pro-anorexia website do? An experimental examination of website exposure and moderating effects.

    Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Kamila M. Cass

  • Explaining the relation between thin ideal internalization and body dissatisfaction among college women: the roles of social comparison and body surveillance.

    Ellen E. Fitzsimmons-Craft;Megan Beth Harney;Laura G. Koehler;Lauren E. Danzi

  • Personality subtyping and bulimia nervosa: psychopathological and genetic correlates

    Stephen A. Wonderlich;Ross D. Crosby;Thomas Joiner;Carol B. Peterson

  • An Overview of Conceptualizations of Eating Disorder Recovery, Recent Findings, and Future Directions.

    Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Rowan A. Hunt;Hunna J. Watson

  • Self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism dimensions and their associations with disordered eating.

    Anna M. Bardone-Cone

  • Predicting bulimic symptoms: an interactive model of self-efficacy, perfectionism, and perceived weight status.

    A. M. Bardone-Cone;L. Y. Abramson;K. D. Vohs;T. F. Heatherton

  • Investigating the impact of pro‐anorexia websites: a pilot study

    Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Kamila M. Cass

  • Exercise caution: Over-exercise is associated with suicidality among individuals with disordered eating

    April R. Smith;Erin L. Fink;Michael D. Anestis;Jessica D. Ribeiro

  • Psychometric Properties of Eating Disorder Instruments in Black and White Young Women: Internal Consistency, Temporal Stability, and Validity

    Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Clarissa A. Boyd

  • Perfectionism across stages of recovery from eating disorders

    Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Katrina Sturm;Melissa A. Lawson;D. Paul Robinson

  • DSM-IV threshold versus subthreshold bulimia nervosa.

    Daniel Le Grange;Roslyn B. Binford;Carol B. Peterson;Scott J. Crow

  • The inter-relationships between vegetarianism and eating disorders among females.

    Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Ellen E. Fitzsimmons-Craft;Megan B. Harney;Christine R. Maldonado

  • Impulsivity and compulsivity in bulimia nervosa.

    Scott G. Engel;Stephanie J. Corneliussen;Stephen A. Wonderlich;Ross D. Crosby

  • Examining an elaborated sociocultural model of disordered eating among college women: the roles of social comparison and body surveillance.

    Ellen E. Fitzsimmons-Craft;Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Cynthia M. Bulik;Stephen A. Wonderlich

  • Development and validation of the Body, Eating, and Exercise Comparison Orientation Measure (BEECOM) among college women.

    Ellen E. Fitzsimmons-Craft;Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Megan B. Harney

  • Affective lability and impulsivity in a clinical sample of women with bulimia nervosa: The role of affect in severely dysregulated behavior

    Michael D. Anestis;Carol B. Peterson;Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Marjorie H. Klein

  • Objectified body consciousness in relation to recovery from an eating disorder

    Ellen E. Fitzsimmons-Craft;Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Kathleen A. Kelly

Frequent Co-Authors

Thomas E. Joiner
Thomas E. Joiner Florida State University
Ellen E. Fitzsimmons-Craft
Ellen E. Fitzsimmons-Craft Washington University in St. Louis
Stephen A. Wonderlich
Stephen A. Wonderlich University of North Dakota
Ross D. Crosby
Ross D. Crosby University of North Dakota
James E. Mitchell
James E. Mitchell University of North Dakota
Cynthia M. Bulik
Cynthia M. Bulik University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Scott J. Crow
Scott J. Crow University of Minnesota
Daniel Le Grange
Daniel Le Grange University of California, San Francisco
Marjorie H. Klein
Marjorie H. Klein University of Wisconsin–Madison
Carol B. Peterson
Carol B. Peterson University of Minnesota

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 opens up a wide range of career opportunities and specializations across the United States. Whether you’re just starting out or looking to advance your current role, selecting the right program can make a significant difference in future prospects.

For those interested in diverse options, the popular psychology degrees in Fort Worth highlight programs with strong student support and flexible learning formats. Meanwhile, students seeking academic prestige may want to consider the top-ranked psychology degree programs in Kent, which are well-regarded for research opportunities and faculty expertise.

The most popular psychology degree programs in Las Vegas focus on practical skills and career readiness, preparing graduates for both clinical and non-clinical roles. For those aiming to pursue counseling or mental health careers, the most popular psychology degree programs in Nashville offer a range of concentrations and online pathways to suit various interests.

No matter where you choose to study, online psychology programs provide flexible options to access quality education and a fulfilling career in a growing field.

Best Scientists Citing Anna M. Bardone-Cone

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles