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 91 929 813 111 101 244 24262

Anthony C. Little publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Anthony C. Little between 1970 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Anthony C. Little published across 56 years, from 1970 to 2025, averaging 4.4 papers a year. Output peaked at 24 publications in 2008. 1 of the 245 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1970 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 24. Peak 24 publications in 2008. 1970: 1 publication 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: 0 publications 1981: 0 publications 1982: 0 publications 1983: 0 publications 1984: 0 publications 1985: 0 publications 1986: 0 publications 1987: 0 publications 1988: 0 publications 1989: 0 publications 1990: 0 publications 1991: 0 publications 1992: 0 publications 1993: 0 publications 1994: 0 publications 1995: 0 publications 1996: 0 publications 1997: 0 publications 1998: 0 publications 1999: 0 publications 2000: 0 publications 2001: 3 publications 2002: 5 publications 2003: 5 publications 2004: 5 publications 2005: 8 publications 2006: 12 publications 2007: 18 publications 2008: 24 publications 2009: 16 publications 2010: 19 publications 2011: 24 publications 2012: 21 publications 2013: 17 publications 2014: 16 publications 2015: 9 publications 2016: 7 publications 2017: 11 publications 2018: 8 publications 2019: 4 publications 2020: 5 publications 2021: 6 publications 2022: 0 publications 2023: 0 publications 2024: 0 publications 2025: 1 publication
1970 2025

245 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Anthony C. Little: publications per year, 1970 to 2025
Year Publications
1970 1
1971 0
1972 0
1973 0
1974 0
1975 0
1976 0
1977 0
1978 0
1979 0
1980 0
1981 0
1982 0
1983 0
1984 0
1985 0
1986 0
1987 0
1988 0
1989 0
1990 0
1991 0
1992 0
1993 0
1994 0
1995 0
1996 0
1997 0
1998 0
1999 0
2000 0
2001 3
2002 5
2003 5
2004 5
2005 8
2006 12
2007 18
2008 24
2009 16
2010 19
2011 24
2012 21
2013 17
2014 16
2015 9
2016 7
2017 11
2018 8
2019 4
2020 5
2021 6
2022 0
2023 0
2024 0
2025 1
Total 245
Download as CSV

Anthony C. Little 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 Anthony C. Little 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, 241–250 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: 244 publications — 79th percentile

79% 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
241–250 196 244
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

Anthony C. Little 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 Anthony C. Little 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, 90–91 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: 91 D-Index — 92nd percentile

92% 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
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 91
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

Anthony C. Little is affiliated with the University of Bath in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily focuses on the broad field of psychology and intersects with social sciences.

Their work spans multiple subfields including experimental and cognitive psychology, sociology and political science, marketing, social psychology, and molecular biology. The main topics of their research cover evolutionary psychology and human behavior, evolutionary game theory and cooperation, marriage and sexual relationships, consumer behavior in brand consumption and identification, attachment and relationship dynamics, demographic trends and gender preferences, as well as sex work and related issues.

Frequent coauthors collaborating with Anthony C. Little include Meike Scheller, Alexandra A. de Sousa, Bruna da Silva Nascimento, Lori A. Brotto, and Francine Matorres.

Their research contributions have been published in various academic journals, with repeated appearances in venues such as Archives of Sexual Behavior, The Journal of Sex Research, Current Psychology, Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, and Symmetry.

Recent papers authored or coauthored by Anthony C. Little include:

  • The Role of Vision in the Emergence of Mate Preferences, 2021, Archives of Sexual Behavior
  • The Role of Sexual and Romantic Attraction in Human Mate Preferences, 2023, The Journal of Sex Research
  • Heterogeneity in the Sexual Orientations of Men Who Have Sex with Fa'afafine in Samoa, 2020, Archives of Sexual Behavior
  • Relationship satisfaction mediates the association between perceived partner mate retention strategies and relationship commitment, 2020, Current Psychology
  • Attachment styles and mate-retention: Exploring the mediating role of relationship satisfaction., 2021, Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences

Best Publications

  • Facial attractiveness: evolutionary based research.

    Anthony C. Little;Benedict C. Jones;Lisa M. DeBruine

  • Testosterone and financial risk preferences

    Coren L. Apicella;Anna Dreber;Anna Dreber;Benjamin Campbell;Peter B. Gray

  • Partnership status and the temporal context of relationships influence human female preferences for sexual dimorphism in male face shape

    A. C. Little;Benedict Christopher Jones;I. S. Penton-Voak;D. M. Burt

  • Self-perceived attractiveness influences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and symmetry in male faces

    A. C. Little;D. M. Burt;I. S. Penton-Voak;D. I. Perrett

  • Facial appearance affects voting decisions.

    Anthony C. Little;Anthony C. Little;Robert P. Burriss;Benedict C. Jones;S. Craig Roberts

  • Manipulations of fundamental and formant frequencies influence the attractiveness of human male voices

    D. R. Feinberg;Benedict Christopher Jones;A. C. Little;D. M. Burt

  • Symmetry, sexual dimorphism in facial proportions and male facial attractiveness.

    I. S. Penton-Voak;Benedict Christopher Jones;A. C. Little;S. Baker

  • Facial symmetry and judgements of apparent health: Support for a “good genes” explanation of the attractiveness–symmetry relationship

    Benedict Christopher Jones;A. C. Little;I. S. Penton-Voak;B. P. Tiddeman

  • Female facial attractiveness increases during the fertile phase of the menstrual cycle

    S. Craig Roberts;Jan Havlicek;Jaroslav Flegr;Martina Hruskova

  • The health of a nation predicts their mate preferences: cross-cultural variation in women's preferences for masculinized male faces

    Lisa M. DeBruine;Benedict C. Jones;John R. Crawford;Lisa L. M. Welling

  • Personality judgments from natural and composite facial images: More evidence for a "kernel of truth" in social perception

    Ian S. Penton-Voak;Nicholas Pound;Anthony C. Little;David I. Perrett

  • Correlated preferences for facial masculinity and ideal or actual partner's masculinity

    Lisa M DeBruine;Benedict C Jones;Anthony C Little;Lynda G Boothroyd

  • Female condition influences preferences for sexual dimorphism in faces of male humans (Homo sapiens).

    I. S. Penton-Voak;A. C. Little;Benedict C. Jones;D. M. Burt

  • Commitment to relationships and preferences for femininity and apparent health in faces are strongest on days of the menstrual cycle when progesterone level is high.

    B.C. Jones;A.C. Little;L.G. Boothroyd;L.M. Debruine

  • When Facial Attractiveness is Only Skin Deep

    Benedict C Jones;Anthony C Little;D Michael Burt;David I Perrett

  • Raised salivary testosterone in women is associated with increased attraction to masculine faces.

    Lisa Welling;Benedict Christopher Jones;Lisa Marie Debruine;C. A. Conway

  • Preferences for masculinity in male bodies change across the menstrual cycle.

    Anthony C. Little;Benedict C. Jones;Robert P. Burriss;Robert P. Burriss

  • Effects of menstrual cycle phase on face preferences.

    Benedict C. Jones;Lisa M. DeBruine;David I. Perrett;Anthony C. Little

  • Evidence from rhesus macaques suggests that male coloration plays a role in female primate mate choice

    Corri Waitt;Anthony C. Little;Sarah Wolfensohn;Paul Honess

  • Menstrual cycle, pregnancy and oral contraceptive use alter attraction to apparent health in faces

    Benedict C. Jones;D. I. Perrett;A. C. Little;L. Boothroyd

Frequent Co-Authors

Benedict C. Jones
Benedict C. Jones University of Strathclyde
Lisa M. DeBruine
Lisa M. DeBruine University of Glasgow
David R. Feinberg
David R. Feinberg McMaster University
S. Craig Roberts
S. Craig Roberts University of Stirling
David I. Perrett
David I. Perrett University of St Andrews
Lisa L. M. Welling
Lisa L. M. Welling Oakland University
Ian S. Penton-Voak
Ian S. Penton-Voak University of Bristol
Coren L. Apicella
Coren L. Apicella University of Pennsylvania
Jan Havlíček
Jan Havlíček Charles University
Barnaby J. W. Dixson
Barnaby J. W. Dixson University of Queensland

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

As you consider studying psychology in the USA, it's worth exploring related online degrees and the diverse career paths available. Social work is a closely related field that attracts many psychology graduates interested in helping others and making a difference in their communities.

Many top institutions in the United States offer flexible, online pathways to enter social work. If you are in Tacoma or the Pacific Northwest, check out the best social work programs in Tacoma. For a broader perspective, reviewing the top social work programs in USA can help you compare options nationwide.

Region-specific opportunities are also available. For example, students in the Mountain West should explore the top social work degrees in Utah. On the East Coast, there are excellent opportunities through the best social work degrees in Virginia.

Whether you pursue psychology or a related degree like social work, these online programs can open doors to rewarding careers in counseling, advocacy, administration, and more.

Best Scientists Citing Anthony C. Little

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles