World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
31
Citations
4280
World Ranking
11177
National Ranking
482

Belle Derks 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 Belle Derks 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: 81 publications — 9th percentile

9% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more.

Belle Derks 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 Belle Derks 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: 31 D-Index — 3rd percentile

3% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Best Publications

  • The queen bee phenomenon: Why women leaders distance themselves from junior women

    Belle Derks;Colette Van Laar;Naomi Ellemers

  • Do sexist organizational cultures create the Queen Bee

    Belle Derks;Naomi Ellemers;Colette van Laar;Kim de Groot

  • Women in high places: When and why promoting women into top positions can harm them individually or as a group (and how to prevent this)

    Naomi Ellemers;Floor Rink;Belle Derks;Michelle K. Ryan

  • Gender-Bias Primes Elicit Queen-Bee Responses Among Senior Policewomen

    Belle Derks;Colette Van Laar;Naomi Ellemers;Kim de Groot

  • Working for the self or working for the group: How self- versus group affirmation affects collective behavior in low-status groups.

    Belle Derks;Colette van Laar;Naomi Ellemers

  • Nothing Changes, Really: Why Women Who Break Through the Glass Ceiling End Up Reinforcing It.

    Klea Faniko;Naomi Ellemers;Belle Derks;Fabio Lorenzi-Cioldi

  • By any means necessary: The effects of regulatory focus and moral conviction on hostile and benevolent forms of collective action

    Maarten P. Zaal;Colette Van Laar;Tomas Ståhl;Naomi Ellemers

  • The Neuroscience of Stigma and Stereotype Threat

    Belle Derks;Michael Inzlicht;Sonia Kang

  • Striving for Success in Outgroup Settings: Effects of Contextually Emphasizing Ingroup Dimensions on Stigmatized Group Members’ Social Identity and Performance Styles

    Belle Derks;Colette van Laar;Naomi Ellemers

  • The threat vs. challenge of car parking for women: How self- and group affirmation affect cardiovascular responses

    Belle Derks;Daan Scheepers;Colette Van Laar;Naomi Ellemers

  • The Beneficial Effects of Social Identity Protection on the Performance Motivation of Members of Devalued Groups

    Belle Derks;Colette Van Laar;Naomi Ellemers

  • Working memory load reduces facilitated processing of threatening faces: an ERP study.

    Lotte F. Van Dillen;Belle Derks

  • Queen Bees and Alpha Males: Are successful women more competitive than successful men?

    Klea Faniko;Naomi Ellemers;Belle Derks

  • Extending the queen bee effect: How Hindustani workers cope with disadvantage by distancing the self from the group

    Belle Derks;Colette van Laar;Naomi Ellemers;Gauwrie Raghoe

  • The Queen Bee phenomenon in Academia 15 years after: Does it still exist, and if so, why?

    Klea Faniko;Naomi Ellemers;Belle Derks

  • Distancing from a stigmatized social identity: State of the art and future research agenda on self‐group distancing

    Ruth van Veelen;Jenny Veldman;Jenny Veldman;Colette Van Laar;Belle Derks

  • Double Trouble: How Being Outnumbered and Negatively Stereotyped Threatens Career Outcomes of Women in STEM.

    Ruth van Veelen;Belle Derks;Maaike Dorine Endedijk

  • Work-family guilt as a straightjacket. An interview and diary study on consequences of mothers' work-family guilt

    Lianne Aarntzen;Belle Derks;Elianne van Steenbergen;Michelle Ryan

  • Valuing Social Identity: Consequences for Motivation and Performance in Low-Status Groups

    Colette Van Laar;Belle Derks;Naomi Ellemers;Dennis Bleeker

  • Reducing Prejudice Through Brain Stimulation

    Roberta Sellaro;Belle Derks;Michael A. Nitsche;Bernhard Hommel

Frequent Co-Authors

Naomi Ellemers
Naomi Ellemers Utrecht University
Daan Scheepers
Daan Scheepers Leiden University
Sander Nieuwenhuis
Sander Nieuwenhuis Leiden University
Manuela Barreto
Manuela Barreto University of Exeter
Michelle K. Ryan
Michelle K. Ryan University of Exeter
Michael Inzlicht
Michael Inzlicht University of Toronto
Judi Mesman
Judi Mesman Leiden University
Tanja van der Lippe
Tanja van der Lippe Utrecht University
Roberta Sellaro
Roberta Sellaro University of Padua

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:

Best Scientists Citing Belle Derks

Recently Published Articles