World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Chad H. Van Iddekinge

Chad H. Van Iddekinge

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Psychology 32 10835 10145 5670 5179 78 5159

Chad H. Van Iddekinge publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Chad H. Van Iddekinge between 2002 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Chad H. Van Iddekinge published across 24 years, from 2002 to 2025, averaging 3.9 papers a year. Output peaked at 10 publications in 2017. 5 of the 93 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
2 4 6 8 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2002 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 10. Peak 10 publications in 2017. 2002: 1 publication 2003: 2 publications 2004: 1 publication 2005: 4 publications 2006: 3 publications 2007: 1 publication 2008: 4 publications 2009: 2 publications 2010: 2 publications 2011: 8 publications 2012: 6 publications 2013: 3 publications 2014: 4 publications 2015: 5 publications 2016: 9 publications 2017: 10 publications 2018: 6 publications 2019: 6 publications 2020: 3 publications 2021: 5 publications 2022: 1 publication 2023: 2 publications 2024: 2 publications 2025: 3 publications
2002 2025

93 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Chad H. Van Iddekinge: publications per year, 2002 to 2025
Year Publications
2002 1
2003 2
2004 1
2005 4
2006 3
2007 1
2008 4
2009 2
2010 2
2011 8
2012 6
2013 3
2014 4
2015 5
2016 9
2017 10
2018 6
2019 6
2020 3
2021 5
2022 1
2023 2
2024 2
2025 3
Total 93
Download as CSV

Chad H. Van Iddekinge 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 Chad H. Van Iddekinge 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, 71–80 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: 78 publications — 8th percentile

8% 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 78
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
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

Chad H. Van Iddekinge 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 Chad H. Van Iddekinge 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, 32–33 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: 32 D-Index — 6th percentile

6% 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 32
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
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

Chad H. Van Iddekinge is affiliated with Florida State University in the United States. Their research primarily spans the field of Business, Management and Accounting, with a notable focus on Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management. The subfields explored further include Clinical Psychology, Gender Studies, Sociology and Political Science, and Social Psychology.

The scientist's recent publications cover various topics within their research domains. Notable papers include:

  • "What's on job seekers' social media sites? A content analysis and effects of structure on recruiter judgments and predictive validity." (2020), published in the Journal of Applied Psychology
  • "Work Effort: A Conceptual and Meta-Analytic Review" (2022), published in the Journal of Management
  • "Personnel selection: A review of ways to maximize validity, diversity, and the applicant experience" (2023), published in Personnel Psychology
  • "Organizational political affiliation and job seekers: If I don't identify with your party, am I still attracted?" (2021), published in the Journal of Applied Psychology
  • "Different starting lines, different finish times: The role of social class in the job search process." (2021), published in the Journal of Applied Psychology

The frequent topics researched include Employer Branding and e-HRM, Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior, Personality Traits and Psychology, Gender Diversity and Inequality, Digital Marketing and Social Media, Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies, and Grit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation.

In terms of collaborative work, Chad H. Van Iddekinge has regularly co-authored articles with several researchers. Frequent co-authors include John D. Arnold, Philip L. Roth, Liwen Zhang, Filip Lievens, and Samantha L. Jordan.

Their work is published prominently in several scholarly venues, with multiple papers appearing in these journals:

  • Journal of Applied Psychology (6 publications)
  • Journal of Management (3 publications)
  • Industrial and Organizational Psychology (2 publications)
  • PsycTESTS Dataset (2 publications)
  • Personnel Psychology (1 publication)

Best Publications

  • Social Media in Employee-Selection-Related Decisions A Research Agenda for Uncharted Territory

    Philip L. Roth;Philip Bobko;Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Jason Bennett Thatcher

  • Are you interested? A meta-analysis of relations between vocational interests and employee performance and turnover.

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Philip L. Roth;Dan J. Putka;Stephen E. Lanivich

  • Social Media for Selection? Validity and Adverse Impact Potential of a Facebook-Based Assessment

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Stephen E. Lanivich;Philip L. Roth;Elliott Junco

  • Individual differences and their measurement : a review of 100 years of research

    Paul R. Sackett;Filip Lievens;Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Nathan R. Kuncel

  • The criterion-related validity of integrity tests: an updated meta-analysis.

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Philip L. Roth;Patrick H. Raymark;Heather N. Odle-Dusseau

  • The team role test: development and validation of a team role knowledge situational judgment test.

    Troy V. Mumford;Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Frederick P. Morgeson;Michael A. Campion

  • A Meta-Analysis of the Interactive, Additive, and Relative Effects of Cognitive Ability and Motivation on Performance:

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Herman Aguinis;Jeremy D. Mackey;Philip S. DeOrtentiis

  • Assessing personality with a structured employment interview: construct-related validity and susceptibility to response inflation.

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Patrick H. Raymark;Philip L. Roth

  • Reconsidering vocational interests for personnel selection: the validity of an interest-based selection test in relation to job knowledge, job performance, and continuance intentions.

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Dan J. Putka;John P. Campbell

  • Effects of Selection and Training on Unit-Level Performance over Time: A Latent Growth Modeling Approach.

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Gerald R. Ferris;Pamela L. Perrewé;Alexa A. Perryman

  • Understanding applicant behavior in employment interviews: A theoretical model of interviewee performance

    Allen I. Huffcutt;Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Philip L. Roth

  • TEST OF A MULTISTAGE MODEL OF DISTAL AND PROXIMAL ANTECEDENTS OF LEADER PERFORMANCE

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Gerald R. Ferris;Tonia S. Heffner

  • Using beta coefficients to impute missing correlations in meta-analysis research: Reasons for caution.

    Philip L. Roth;Huy Le;In Sue Oh;Chad H. Van Iddekinge

  • Line manager implementation perceptions as a mediator of relations between high-performance work practices and employee outcomes.

    David M. Sikora;Gerald R. Ferris;Chad H. Van Iddekinge

  • DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CRITERION‐RELATED VALIDATION OF SELECTION PROCEDURES: A CRITICAL REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRACTICE

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Robert E. Ployhart

  • Antecedents of Impression Management Use and Effectiveness in a Structured Interview

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Lynn A. McFarland;Patrick H. Raymark

  • ARE HIGHLY STRUCTURED JOB INTERVIEWS RESISTANT TO DEMOGRAPHIC SIMILARITY EFFECTS

    Julie M. McCARTHY;Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Michael A. Campion

  • Taking it to another level: do personality-based human capital resources matter to firm performance?

    In-Sue Oh;Seongsu Kim;Chad H. Van Iddekinge

  • What Do Structured Selection Interviews Really Measure? The Construct Validity of Behavior Description Interviews

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Patrick H. Raymark;Carl E. Eidson;William J. Attenweiler

  • Do Candidate Reactions Relate to Job Performance or Affect Criterion-Related Validity? A Multistudy Investigation of Relations Among Reactions, Selection Test Scores, and Job Performance

    Julie Mccarthy;Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Filip Lievens;Mavis Mei-Chuan Kung

  • Corrections for range restriction in structured interview ethnic group differences: the values may be larger than researchers thought.

    Philip L. Roth;Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Allen I. Huffcutt;Carl E. Eidson Jr.

Frequent Co-Authors

Philip L. Roth
Philip L. Roth Clemson University
In-Sue Oh
In-Sue Oh Temple University
Michael A. Campion
Michael A. Campion Purdue University West Lafayette
Philip Bobko
Philip Bobko Gettysburg College
Gerald R. Ferris
Gerald R. Ferris Florida State University
Robert E. Ployhart
Robert E. Ployhart University of South Carolina
Filip Lievens
Filip Lievens Singapore Management University
Herman Aguinis
Herman Aguinis George Washington University
Frederick P. Morgeson
Frederick P. Morgeson Michigan State University
Talya N. Bauer
Talya N. Bauer Portland State 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

Pursuing Psychology in the USA opens doors to diverse online degrees and specialized career pathways. One popular option is becoming a Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA), a profession focused on applied behavior analysis and intervention. To enter this field, you'll typically need a graduate degree in psychology or a related area, complete approved coursework, gain supervised experience, and pass a national certification exam.

Requirements can vary by location. For example, learn about Santa Ana bcba education requirements to understand what credentials are necessary in that region. Similarly, discover the specific bcba certification requirements in Scottsdale and review key steps for aspiring professionals.

If you’re interested in working in the Pacific Northwest, it’s helpful to review Seattle bcba requirements and explore how local expectations influence your career trajectory. Likewise, aspiring BCBAs can find guidance on the steps and educational pathways needed by reading about how to become a bcba in Spokane.

Online degrees in psychology or behavior analysis offer flexibility, making it easier to meet regional requirements and advance in specialized fields like ABA therapy. Researching local certification standards is essential for planning a successful psychology career in the U.S.

Best Scientists Citing Chad H. Van Iddekinge

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles