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 66 2642 2419 1519 1358 115 30491
Neuroscience 64 3199 2920 1482 1334 107 28744

Antonio Rangel publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Antonio Rangel between 1993 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Antonio Rangel published across 33 years, from 1993 to 2025, averaging 4.1 papers a year. Output peaked at 19 publications in 2011. 4 of the 135 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1993 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 19. Peak 19 publications in 2011. 1993: 1 publication 1994: 1 publication 1995: 0 publications 1996: 1 publication 1997: 1 publication 1998: 0 publications 1999: 2 publications 2000: 1 publication 2001: 1 publication 2002: 2 publications 2003: 2 publications 2004: 1 publication 2005: 3 publications 2006: 1 publication 2007: 6 publications 2008: 11 publications 2009: 11 publications 2010: 18 publications 2011: 19 publications 2012: 10 publications 2013: 10 publications 2014: 10 publications 2015: 5 publications 2016: 2 publications 2017: 2 publications 2018: 0 publications 2019: 3 publications 2020: 2 publications 2021: 2 publications 2022: 2 publications 2023: 1 publication 2024: 2 publications 2025: 2 publications
1993 2025

135 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Antonio Rangel: publications per year, 1993 to 2025
Year Publications
1993 1
1994 1
1995 0
1996 1
1997 1
1998 0
1999 2
2000 1
2001 1
2002 2
2003 2
2004 1
2005 3
2006 1
2007 6
2008 11
2009 11
2010 18
2011 19
2012 10
2013 10
2014 10
2015 5
2016 2
2017 2
2018 0
2019 3
2020 2
2021 2
2022 2
2023 1
2024 2
2025 2
Total 135
Download as CSV

Antonio Rangel 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 Antonio Rangel 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, 111–120 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: 115 publications — 29th percentile

29% 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
111–120 686 115
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

Antonio Rangel 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 Antonio Rangel 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, 66–67 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: 66 D-Index — 77th percentile

77% 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 66
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

Antonio Rangel is affiliated with the California Institute of Technology in the United States. Their research spans multiple disciplines including cognitive neuroscience, economics and econometrics, atmospheric science, global and planetary change, and general decision sciences. They have contributed notably to topics such as economic and environmental valuation, neural and behavioral psychology studies, remote sensing and land use, land use and ecosystem services, decision-making and behavioral economics, olfactory and sensory function studies, and remote-sensing image classification.

They have published multiple papers that cover a range of fields and applications. Recent publications include:

  • Fixation patterns in simple choice reflect optimal information sampling, 2021, PLoS Computational Biology
  • Peripheral Visual Information Halves Attentional Choice Biases, 2023, Psychological Science
  • Land Cover Image Classification, 2024, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Peripheral visual information halves attentional choice biases, 2022, 2022 Conference on Cognitive Computational Neuroscience
  • A Cellular-Level Account of Classical Conditioning, 2022, 2022 Conference on Cognitive Computational Neuroscience

Antonio Rangel frequently collaborates with a core group of coauthors, including:

  • Pantelis Vafidis
  • Brenden Eum
  • Stephanie Dolbier
  • Juan Terven
  • Diana-Margarita Córdova-Esparza

Their work has appeared repeatedly in specific publication venues that include:

  • PLoS Computational Biology
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • 2022 Conference on Cognitive Computational Neuroscience
  • Psychological Science
  • Data

In cognitive neuroscience, their research addresses aspects of decision-making and behavioral economics, examining the neural and behavioral mechanisms underlying choices. Their studies on economic and environmental valuation connect cognitive insights with implications for land use and ecosystem services.

In the realm of atmospheric science and global change, their research includes remote-sensing techniques and land cover image classification, integrating computational methods with environmental applications.

Antonio Rangel's interdisciplinary focus bridges behavioral studies with environmental science, supporting a comprehensive understanding of both human and ecological systems through their body of published work.

Best Publications

  • A framework for studying the neurobiology of value-based decision making

    Antonio Rangel;Colin F Camerer;P. Read Montague

  • Self-control in decision-making involves modulation of the vmPFC valuation system

    Todd A. Hare;Colin F. Camerer;Antonio Rangel

  • Visual fixations and the computation and comparison of value in simple choice

    Ian Krajbich;Carrie Armel;Antonio Rangel

  • Marketing actions can modulate neural representations of experienced pleasantness

    Hilke Plassmann;John O'Doherty;Baba Shiv;Antonio Rangel

  • Orbitofrontal Cortex Encodes Willingness to Pay in Everyday Economic Transactions

    Hilke Plassmann;John O'Doherty;Antonio Rangel

  • Addiction and Cue-Triggered Decision Processes.

    B. Douglas Bernheim;Antonio Rangel

  • Beyond Revealed Preference: Choice-Theoretic Foundations for Behavioral Welfare Economics

    B. Douglas Bernheim;Antonio Rangel

  • Dissociating the Role of the Orbitofrontal Cortex and the Striatum in the Computation of Goal Values and Prediction Errors

    Todd A. Hare;John P. O'Doherty;Colin F. Camerer;Wolfram Schultz

  • Multialternative drift-diffusion model predicts the relationship between visual fixations and choice in value-based decisions

    Ian Krajbich;Antonio Rangel

  • Evidence for a Common Representation of Decision Values for Dissimilar Goods in Human Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex

    Vikram S. Chib;Antonio Rangel;Shinsuke Shimojo;John P. O'Doherty;John P. O'Doherty

  • Informatic parcellation of the network involved in the computation of subjective value.

    John A. Clithero;Antonio Rangel

  • Neural computations associated with goal-directed choice

    Antonio Rangel;Todd Hare

  • Value computations in ventral medial prefrontal cortex during charitable decision making incorporate input from regions involved in social cognition.

    Todd A. Hare;Colin F. Camerer;Daniel T. Knoepfle;Antonio Rangel

  • Focusing Attention on the Health Aspects of Foods Changes Value Signals in vmPFC and Improves Dietary Choice

    Todd A. Hare;Jonathan Malmaud;Antonio Rangel

  • Neural evidence for inequality-averse social preferences

    Elizabeth Tricomi;Antonio Rangel;Colin F. Camerer;John P. O’Doherty;John P. O’Doherty

  • Relative visual saliency differences induce sizable bias in consumer choice

    Milica Milosavljevic;Vidhya Navalpakkam;Christof Koch;Antonio Rangel

  • Biasing simple choices by manipulating relative visual attention

    K. Carrie Armel;Aurelie Beaumel;Antonio Rangel

  • The attentional drift-diffusion model extends to simple purchasing decisions

    Ian Krajbich;Dingchao Lu;Colin Camerer;Antonio Rangel

  • Appetitive and aversive goal values are encoded in the medial orbitofrontal cortex at the time of decision making.

    Hilke Plassmann;John P. O'Doherty;Antonio Rangel

  • Transformation of stimulus value signals into motor commands during simple choice

    Todd A. Hare;Wolfram Schultz;Colin F. Camerer;John P. O'Doherty

Frequent Co-Authors

B. Douglas Bernheim
B. Douglas Bernheim Stanford University
Colin F. Camerer
Colin F. Camerer California Institute of Technology
John P. O'Doherty
John P. O'Doherty California Institute of Technology
Christof Koch
Christof Koch Allen Institute for Brain Science
Todd A. Hare
Todd A. Hare University of Zurich
Elhanan Helpman
Elhanan Helpman Harvard University
Ralph Adolphs
Ralph Adolphs California Institute of Technology
Pietro Perona
Pietro Perona California Institute of Technology
Peter Bossaerts
Peter Bossaerts University of Cambridge
Shinsuke Shimojo
Shinsuke Shimojo California Institute of Technology

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

Studying Psychology in the USA can open the door to a diverse range of career opportunities, especially in fields such as social work, counseling, and mental health services. Aspiring professionals may find online degree programs particularly appealing for their flexibility and accessibility.

When considering a career as a social worker, it’s important to understand that requirements differ by state. For example, the degree needed to be a social worker in New Mexico typically includes a Bachelor’s in Social Work (BSW) for entry-level roles, with advanced licensure often requiring a Master’s degree.

Similarly, New York education requirements for social workers are more rigorous, often necessitating a Master of Social Work (MSW) and post-graduate clinical experience. In contrast, the North Carolina minimum degree requirement for social workers is a BSW, but more advanced roles may require additional credentials.

For those interested in practicing in the Midwest, social worker degree requirements in North Dakota highlight the importance of both education and supervised experience.

Exploring online degrees in psychology or social work can be a strategic first step in meeting these varied requirements and launching a rewarding career.

Best Scientists Citing Antonio Rangel

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles