World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
57
Citations
25085
World Ranking
3947
National Ranking
2210

Bella M. DePaulo 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 Bella M. DePaulo sits on this spectrum.

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 publications 705+

This scientist: 114 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.

Bella M. DePaulo 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 Bella M. DePaulo sits on this spectrum.

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 D-Index 144+

This scientist: 57 D-Index — 66th percentile

66% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more.

Overview

Bella M. DePaulo is affiliated with the University of California, Santa Barbara in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on the social sciences, with specific attention to sociology and political science, demography, and health. The body of work includes a total of six publications within these fields, evidencing a multidisciplinary approach to social research.

The main topics addressed in their research cover family dynamics and relationships, intergenerational family dynamics and caregiving, work-family balance challenges, and health disparities and outcomes. These topics have formed the core thematic areas across multiple publications, reflecting consistent scholarly interest and investigation.

  • Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Intergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
  • Work-Family Balance Challenges
  • Health disparities and outcomes

Among their recent academic contributions is the paper titled Single and flourishing: Transcending the deficit narratives of single life, published in 2023 in the Journal of Family Theory & Review. This publication has received citations, indicating engagement from the academic community within the field of family theory and social relations.

  • Single and flourishing: Transcending the deficit narratives of single life (2023), Journal of Family Theory & Review

The Journal of Family Theory & Review serves as a frequent publication venue for their work, emphasizing a consistent engagement with this scholarly journal. Collaborations have also taken place, notably with Elyakim Kislev, indicating cooperative research efforts and shared academic interests.

  • Journal of Family Theory & Review

  • Elyakim Kislev

The research conducted by Bella M. DePaulo spans various interconnected domains, exploring the complexities of social relationships and the challenges associated with family structures, caregiving roles, and work-life interactions. Their contributions provide insight into both theoretical and applied aspects within these research areas.

Best Publications

  • Cues to deception

    Bella M. DePaulo;James J. Lindsay;Brian E. Malone;Laura Muhlenbruck

  • Accuracy of Deception Judgments

    Charles F. Bond;Bella M. DePaulo

  • Lying in everyday life.

    Bella M. DePaulo;Deborah A. Kashy;Susan E. Kirkendol;Melissa M. Wyer

  • Verbal and Nonverbal Communication of Deception

    Miron Zuckerman;Bella M. DePaulo;Robert Rosenthal

  • Nonverbal behavior and self-presentation

    Bella M. DePaulo

  • Everyday lies in close and casual relationships

    Bella M. DePaulo;Deborah A. Kashy

  • Do people know how others view them? An empirical and theoretical account.

    David A. Kenny;Bella M. DePaulo

  • Individual differences in judging deception: accuracy and bias.

    Charles F. Bond;Bella M. DePaulo

  • Attributional Bias among Aggressive Boys to Interpret Unambiguous Social Stimuli as Displays of Hostility.

    William Nasby;Brian Hayden;Bella M. DePaulo

  • Singles in Society and in Science

    Bella M. DePaulo;Wendy L. Morris

  • The motivational impairment effect in the communication of deception: Replications and extensions

    Bella M. DePaulo;Susan E. Kirkendol;John Tang;Thomas P. O'Brien

  • The Accuracy-Confidence Correlation in the Detection of Deception

    Bella M. DePaulo;Kelly Charlton;Harris Cooper;James J. Lindsay

  • On-the-Job Experience and Skill at Detecting Deception1

    Bella M. DePaulo;Roger L. Pfeifer

  • Singled Out: How Singles Are Stereotyped, Stigmatized, and Ignored, and Still Live Happily Ever After

    Bella M. DePaulo

  • Effects of actual deception and suspiciousness of deception on interpersonal perceptions.

    Carol Toris;Bella M. DePaulo

  • Sex differences in eavesdropping on nonverbal cues.

    Robert Rosenthal;Bella M. DePaulo

  • Detecting the deceit of the motivated liar.

    Bella M. DePaulo;Keith Lanier;Tracy Davis

  • Accuracy of person perception: Do people know what kinds of impressions they convey?

    Bella M. DePaulo;David A. Kenny;Claudia W. Hoover;William Webb

  • TARGET ARTICLE: Singles in Society and in Science

    Bella M. DePaulo;Wendy L. Morris

  • The Motivational Impairment Effect in the Communication of Deception

    Bella M. DePaulo;Susan E. Kirkendol

  • New directions in helping

    Jeffrey D. Fisher;Arie Nadler;Bella M. DePaulo

Frequent Co-Authors

Robert Rosenthal
Robert Rosenthal University of California, Riverside
Jeffrey D. Fisher
Jeffrey D. Fisher University of Connecticut
Miron Zuckerman
Miron Zuckerman University of Rochester
Arie Nadler
Arie Nadler Tel Aviv University
Peter Blanck
Peter Blanck Syracuse University
Harris Cooper
Harris Cooper Duke University
Jennifer A. Epstein
Jennifer A. Epstein Cornell University
David A. Kenny
David A. Kenny Teagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority
Astrid Schütz
Astrid Schütz University of Bamberg
Timothy D. Wilson
Timothy D. Wilson University of Virginia

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

Earning a degree in Psychology from a U.S. institution provides a strong foundation for a variety of roles in mental health and counseling. Many students pursue online degrees to fit their studies around work or family commitments. These flexible programs can prepare you for career pathways such as becoming a Licensed Professional Counselor (LPC), school counselor, or clinical therapist.

It’s important to understand the licensure requirements in your desired location, as each state or city has specific guidelines. For example, if you are interested in Aurora licensed therapist requirements or want to learn about Austin licensed therapist education requirements, you’ll find that coursework, internships, and exam criteria can differ.

For those considering California or Maryland, review the steps on how to become a licensed therapist in Bakersfield or explore Baltimore licensed therapist requirements to understand regional expectations.

By researching these pathways and choosing the right online program, you can position yourself for a rewarding career in the diverse field of mental health.

Best Scientists Citing Bella M. DePaulo

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles