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
Social Sciences and Humanities 35 6640 6176 1066 991 117 7580

Ben Ambridge publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Ben Ambridge between 2003 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Ben Ambridge published across 23 years, from 2003 to 2025, averaging 5.7 papers a year. Output peaked at 18 publications in 2011. 8 of the 132 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2003 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 18. Peak 18 publications in 2011. 2003: 1 publication 2004: 1 publication 2005: 0 publications 2006: 3 publications 2007: 0 publications 2008: 3 publications 2009: 5 publications 2010: 2 publications 2011: 18 publications 2012: 4 publications 2013: 6 publications 2014: 8 publications 2015: 12 publications 2016: 7 publications 2017: 8 publications 2018: 13 publications 2019: 5 publications 2020: 10 publications 2021: 10 publications 2022: 4 publications 2023: 4 publications 2024: 4 publications 2025: 4 publications
2003 2025

132 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Ben Ambridge: publications per year, 2003 to 2025
Year Publications
2003 1
2004 1
2005 0
2006 3
2007 0
2008 3
2009 5
2010 2
2011 18
2012 4
2013 6
2014 8
2015 12
2016 7
2017 8
2018 13
2019 5
2020 10
2021 10
2022 4
2023 4
2024 4
2025 4
Total 132
Download as CSV

Ben Ambridge publication distribution in Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Ben Ambridge sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300 400
Bar chart with 54 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 44–53 to 570+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 474. Most scientists, 474, have 114–123 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 570 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 114–123 publications, is where this scientist sits. 44–53 publications: 28 scientists 54–63 publications: 61 scientists 64–73 publications: 161 scientists 74–83 publications: 225 scientists 84–93 publications: 301 scientists 94–103 publications: 390 scientists 104–113 publications: 406 scientists 114–123 publications: 474 scientists 124–133 publications: 453 scientists 134–143 publications: 434 scientists 144–153 publications: 407 scientists 154–163 publications: 411 scientists 164–173 publications: 391 scientists 174–183 publications: 313 scientists 184–193 publications: 319 scientists 194–203 publications: 304 scientists 204–213 publications: 285 scientists 214–223 publications: 246 scientists 224–233 publications: 213 scientists 234–243 publications: 170 scientists 244–253 publications: 167 scientists 254–263 publications: 162 scientists 264–273 publications: 138 scientists 274–283 publications: 138 scientists 284–293 publications: 113 scientists 294–303 publications: 106 scientists 304–313 publications: 95 scientists 314–323 publications: 101 scientists 324–333 publications: 81 scientists 334–343 publications: 69 scientists 344–353 publications: 56 scientists 354–363 publications: 36 scientists 364–373 publications: 42 scientists 374–383 publications: 41 scientists 384–393 publications: 44 scientists 394–403 publications: 27 scientists 404–413 publications: 30 scientists 414–423 publications: 20 scientists 424–433 publications: 29 scientists 434–443 publications: 29 scientists 444–453 publications: 25 scientists 454–463 publications: 19 scientists 464–473 publications: 21 scientists 474–483 publications: 11 scientists 484–493 publications: 17 scientists 494–503 publications: 7 scientists 504–513 publications: 6 scientists 514–523 publications: 12 scientists 524–533 publications: 10 scientists 534–543 publications: 7 scientists 544–553 publications: 6 scientists 554–563 publications: 12 scientists 564–569 publications: 8 scientists 570+ publications: 100 scientists
44–53 publications 570+

This scientist: 117 publications — 23rd percentile

23% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 570 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 7,777 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
44–53 28
54–63 61
64–73 161
74–83 225
84–93 301
94–103 390
104–113 406
114–123 474 117
124–133 453
134–143 434
144–153 407
154–163 411
164–173 391
174–183 313
184–193 319
194–203 304
204–213 285
214–223 246
224–233 213
234–243 170
244–253 167
254–263 162
264–273 138
274–283 138
284–293 113
294–303 106
304–313 95
314–323 101
324–333 81
334–343 69
344–353 56
354–363 36
364–373 42
374–383 41
384–393 44
394–403 27
404–413 30
414–423 20
424–433 29
434–443 29
444–453 25
454–463 19
464–473 21
474–483 11
484–493 17
494–503 7
504–513 6
514–523 12
524–533 10
534–543 7
544–553 6
554–563 12
564–569 8
570+ 100
Download as CSV

Ben Ambridge D-index placement in Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Ben Ambridge sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300
Bar chart with 71 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30 to 100+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 313. Most scientists, 313, have 42 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 100 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 35 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 30 D-Index: 177 scientists 31 D-Index: 210 scientists 32 D-Index: 222 scientists 33 D-Index: 188 scientists 34 D-Index: 181 scientists 35 D-Index: 243 scientists 36 D-Index: 261 scientists 37 D-Index: 272 scientists 38 D-Index: 278 scientists 39 D-Index: 300 scientists 40 D-Index: 297 scientists 41 D-Index: 308 scientists 42 D-Index: 313 scientists 43 D-Index: 300 scientists 44 D-Index: 269 scientists 45 D-Index: 260 scientists 46 D-Index: 228 scientists 47 D-Index: 251 scientists 48 D-Index: 203 scientists 49 D-Index: 186 scientists 50 D-Index: 187 scientists 51 D-Index: 166 scientists 52 D-Index: 138 scientists 53 D-Index: 141 scientists 54 D-Index: 131 scientists 55 D-Index: 137 scientists 56 D-Index: 109 scientists 57 D-Index: 129 scientists 58 D-Index: 95 scientists 59 D-Index: 105 scientists 60 D-Index: 106 scientists 61 D-Index: 86 scientists 62 D-Index: 94 scientists 63 D-Index: 77 scientists 64 D-Index: 79 scientists 65 D-Index: 59 scientists 66 D-Index: 68 scientists 67 D-Index: 51 scientists 68 D-Index: 49 scientists 69 D-Index: 40 scientists 70 D-Index: 43 scientists 71 D-Index: 40 scientists 72 D-Index: 50 scientists 73 D-Index: 46 scientists 74 D-Index: 43 scientists 75 D-Index: 45 scientists 76 D-Index: 45 scientists 77 D-Index: 30 scientists 78 D-Index: 25 scientists 79 D-Index: 31 scientists 80 D-Index: 29 scientists 81 D-Index: 18 scientists 82 D-Index: 21 scientists 83 D-Index: 26 scientists 84 D-Index: 15 scientists 85 D-Index: 15 scientists 86 D-Index: 19 scientists 87 D-Index: 19 scientists 88 D-Index: 12 scientists 89 D-Index: 7 scientists 90 D-Index: 19 scientists 91 D-Index: 20 scientists 92 D-Index: 13 scientists 93 D-Index: 9 scientists 94 D-Index: 13 scientists 95 D-Index: 8 scientists 96 D-Index: 7 scientists 97 D-Index: 6 scientists 98 D-Index: 6 scientists 99 D-Index: 6 scientists 100+ D-Index: 97 scientists
30 D-Index 100+

This scientist: 35 D-Index — 16th percentile

16% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 100 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 7,777 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30 177
31 210
32 222
33 188
34 181
35 243 35
36 261
37 272
38 278
39 300
40 297
41 308
42 313
43 300
44 269
45 260
46 228
47 251
48 203
49 186
50 187
51 166
52 138
53 141
54 131
55 137
56 109
57 129
58 95
59 105
60 106
61 86
62 94
63 77
64 79
65 59
66 68
67 51
68 49
69 40
70 43
71 40
72 50
73 46
74 43
75 45
76 45
77 30
78 25
79 31
80 29
81 18
82 21
83 26
84 15
85 15
86 19
87 19
88 12
89 7
90 19
91 20
92 13
93 9
94 13
95 8
96 7
97 6
98 6
99 6
100+ 97
Download as CSV

Overview

Ben Ambridge is affiliated with the University of Manchester in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily focuses on psychology, with significant contributions to arts and humanities. The subfields of study include developmental and educational psychology, language and linguistics, cognitive neuroscience, artificial intelligence, and experimental and cognitive psychology.

Their main research topics cover language development and disorders, reading and literacy development, neurobiology of language and bilingualism, syntax, semantics, linguistic variation, language, discourse, communication strategies, natural language processing techniques, and language, metaphor, and cognition.

Ben Ambridge has published extensively in various academic venues. Frequent publication outlets include Open Research Europe, Language and Cognition, Collabra Psychology, Cognitive Science, and Journal of Child Language.

  • Open Research Europe
  • Language and Cognition
  • Collabra Psychology
  • Cognitive Science
  • Journal of Child Language

Among recent papers, notable works include:

  • "Abstractions made of exemplars or 'You're all right, and I've changed my mind': Response to commentators" (2020) published in First Language
  • "The crosslinguistic acquisition of sentence structure: Computational modeling and grammaticality judgments from adult and child speakers of English, Japanese, Hindi, Hebrew and K'iche'" (2020) published in Cognition
  • "Disentangling syntactic, semantic and pragmatic impairments in ASD: Elicited production of passives" (2020) published in Journal of Child Language
  • "Syntactic Representations Are Both Abstract and Semantically Constrained: Evidence From Children's and Adults' Comprehension and Production/Priming of the English Passive" (2020) published in Cognitive Science
  • "Verb argument structure overgeneralisations for the English intransitive and transitive constructions: grammaticality judgments and production priming" (2021) published in Language and Cognition

Ambridge collaborates regularly with several coauthors, including Ramya Maitreyee, Amy Bidgood, Caroline F. Rowland, Soumitra Samanta, and Dipti Misra Sharma. These collaborations have resulted in multiple joint publications across the primary research themes mentioned.

Best Publications

  • The structure of working memory from 4 to 15 years of age.

    Susan E. Gathercole;Susan J. Pickering;Benjamin Ambridge;Hannah Wearing

  • Child language acquisition : contrasting theoretical approaches

    Ben Ambridge;Elena V. M. Lieven

  • The ubiquity of frequency effects in first language acquisition

    Ben Ambridge;Evan Kidd;Caroline F. Rowland;Anna L. Theakston

  • The development of abstract syntax: evidence from structural priming and the lexical boost.

    Caroline F. Rowland;Franklin Chang;Ben Ambridge;Julian M. Pine

  • The effect of verb semantic class and verb frequency (entrenchment) on children’s and adults’ graded judgements of argument-structure overgeneralization errors

    Ben Ambridge;Julian M. Pine;Caroline F. Rowland;Chris R. Young

  • The island status of clausal complements: Evidence in favor of an information structure explanation

    Ben Ambridge;Adele E. Goldberg

  • The distributed learning effect for children's acquisition of an abstract grammatical construction

    Ben Ambridge;Anna L. Theakston;Elena V.M. Lieven;Michael Tomasello

  • Experimental methods in studying child language acquisition

    Ben Ambridge;Caroline F. Rowland

  • Child Language Acquisition: List of tables

    Ben Ambridge;Elena V. M. Lieven

  • Comparing different accounts of inversion errors in children's non-subject wh-questions: 'What experimental data can tell us?'.

    Ben Ambridge;Caroline F. Rowland;Anna L. Theakston;Michael Tomasello

  • Child language acquisition: Why universal grammar doesn't help

    Ben Ambridge;Julian M. Pine;Elena V. M. Lieven

  • Semantics versus statistics in the retreat from locative overgeneralization errors.

    Ben Ambridge;Julian M. Pine;Caroline F. Rowland

  • The roles of verb semantics, entrenchment, and morphophonology in the retreat from dative argument-structure overgeneralization errors

    Ben Ambridge;Julian M. Pine;Caroline F. Rowland;Franklin Chang

  • Avoiding dative overgeneralisation errors: Semantics, statistics or both?

    Ben Ambridge;Julian M. Pine;Caroline F. Rowland;Daniel Freudenthal

  • The retreat from overgeneralization in child language acquisition: word learning, morphology, and verb argument structure.

    Ben Ambridge;Julian M. Pine;Caroline F. Rowland;Franklin Chang

  • A Constructivist Account of Child Language Acquisition

    Ben Ambridge;Elena V. M. Lieven

  • A Semantics-Based Approach to the “no negative evidence” problem

    Ben Ambridge;Julian M. Pine;Caroline F. Rowland;Rebecca L. Jones

  • Is Structure Dependence an Innate Constraint? New Experimental Evidence From Children's Complex‐Question Production

    Ben Ambridge;Caroline F. Rowland;Julian M. Pine

  • Children's judgments of regular and irregular novel past-tense forms: new data on the English past-tense debate.

    Ben Ambridge

  • How do children restrict their linguistic generalizations? An (un-)grammaticality judgment study.

    Ben Ambridge

  • Infinitives or bare stems? Are English-speaking children defaulting to the highest-frequency form?

    Sanna H. M. Räsänen;Ben Ambridge;Julian M. Pine

Frequent Co-Authors

Julian M. Pine
Julian M. Pine University of Liverpool
Elena Lieven
Elena Lieven University of Manchester
Caroline F. Rowland
Caroline F. Rowland Radboud University
Anna L. Theakston
Anna L. Theakston University of Manchester
Michael Tomasello
Michael Tomasello Duke University
Ruth A. Berman
Ruth A. Berman Tel Aviv University
Evan Kidd
Evan Kidd Australian National University
Adele E. Goldberg
Adele E. Goldberg Princeton University

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 Social Sciences and Humanities in the USA opens up diverse and flexible online study options. Many students now choose specialized online programs to balance education with other life commitments. For those interested in clinical practice or counseling, psy d programs provide advanced training in psychology with a strong focus on practice over research.

If you are seeking a faster route into marriage and family therapy, accelerated mft programs online offer condensed coursework so you can graduate and enter the workforce sooner. Cost is also a key concern for many. In this case, online masters in clinical psychology programs combine affordability with flexibility, making graduate study accessible to more students.

Ambitious individuals looking to move into educational leadership might benefit from shortest online edd programs that offer fast-track options to earn a doctorate in education in less time. Whichever path you choose, taking advantage of these flexible online options can help you tailor your studies to your career goals and lifestyle needs.

Best Scientists Citing Ben Ambridge

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles