World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo

Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Social Sciences and Humanities 50 2802 2561 29 27 173 8834
Engineering and Technology 46 5214 5022 159 157 142 7347

Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo between 2000 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo published across 26 years, from 2000 to 2025, averaging 7.8 papers a year. Output peaked at 19 publications in 2022. 18 of the 202 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2000 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 19. Peak 19 publications in 2022. 2000: 1 publication 2001: 0 publications 2002: 0 publications 2003: 0 publications 2004: 0 publications 2005: 1 publication 2006: 0 publications 2007: 0 publications 2008: 3 publications 2009: 9 publications 2010: 7 publications 2011: 15 publications 2012: 11 publications 2013: 10 publications 2014: 12 publications 2015: 15 publications 2016: 12 publications 2017: 10 publications 2018: 12 publications 2019: 16 publications 2020: 13 publications 2021: 11 publications 2022: 19 publications 2023: 7 publications 2024: 11 publications 2025: 7 publications
2000 2025

202 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo: publications per year, 2000 to 2025
Year Publications
2000 1
2001 0
2002 0
2003 0
2004 0
2005 1
2006 0
2007 0
2008 3
2009 9
2010 7
2011 15
2012 11
2013 10
2014 12
2015 15
2016 12
2017 10
2018 12
2019 16
2020 13
2021 11
2022 19
2023 7
2024 11
2025 7
Total 202
Download as CSV

Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo publications per year - data summary

  • Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, a Social Sciences and Humanities scholar from University of Rome Tor Vergata, has 202 publications recorded across 26 years, from 2000 to 2025.
  • The oldest publication on record dates to 2000 and the most recent to 2025.
  • The most productive year is 2022, with 19 publications.
  • The least productive years with any output are 2000 and 2005, with 1 publication each.
  • 6 of the 26 years in the span carry no publications at all (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and others).
  • The rate of publication averages 7.8 papers per year over the whole span, or 10.1 per year counting only the 20 years with at least one publication.
  • The last 5 years on the chart (2021-2025) hold 55 publications, 27% of the career total.
  • Split into equal eras - 2000-2008: 5 publications (0.6 per year); 2009-2017: 101 publications (11.2 per year); 2018-2025: 96 publications (12.0 per year).
  • Comparing the opening and closing eras, the overall trend of publication is rising.

Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo 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 Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo 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, 164–173 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: 173 publications — 53rd percentile

53% 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
124–133 453
134–143 434
144–153 407
154–163 411
164–173 391 173
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

Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo publication distribution in Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the publication count of all 7,777 Social Sciences and Humanities scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 54 ranges running from 44–53 to 570+ publications.
  • Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, a Social Sciences and Humanities scholar from University of Rome Tor Vergata, records 173 publications - the 53rd percentile of the discipline.
  • 53% of ranked Social Sciences and Humanities scientists score the same or lower than Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, and about 47% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 164–173 publications range, and Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo falls inside that same range.
  • The most crowded range is 114–123 publications, holding 474 scientists (6% of the field).
  • 57% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 174–183 publications), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 570 publications or more, 100 scientists in all (1% of the field).

Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo 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 Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo 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, 50 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: 50 D-Index — 66th percentile

66% 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
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 50
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

Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo D-index placement in Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the discipline H-index (D-index) of all 7,777 Social Sciences and Humanities scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 71 ranges running from 30 to 100+ D-Index.
  • Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, a Social Sciences and Humanities scholar from University of Rome Tor Vergata, records 50 D-Index - the 66th percentile of the discipline.
  • 66% of ranked Social Sciences and Humanities scientists score the same or lower than Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, and about 34% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 45 D-Index range, and Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo ranks above the median.
  • The most crowded range is 42 D-Index, holding 313 scientists (4% of the field).
  • 59% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 47 D-Index), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 100 D-Index or more, 97 scientists in all (1% of the field).

Overview

Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo is affiliated with the University of Rome Tor Vergata in Italy. Their research primarily focuses on decision sciences, with a notable emphasis on areas such as statistics, probability and uncertainty, economics and econometrics, strategy and management, political science and international relations, and information systems and management.

The scientist's research spans several main topics including scientometrics and bibliometrics research, innovation and knowledge management, academic publishing and open access, higher education governance and development, innovation policy and R&D, entrepreneurship studies and influences, and economic history with a focus on Italy.

Frequent co-authors collaborating with D'Angelo include Giovanni Abramo, Flavia Di Costa, Leonardo Grilli, Francesca Apponi, and Dag W. Aksnes. These collaborations reflect a multidisciplinary approach within the research community.

The scientist has contributed to multiple publication venues with significant presence in:

  • Scientometrics
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Journal of Informetrics
  • Cineca Institutional Research Information System (Tor Vergata University)
  • Research Evaluation

Among their recent publications are the following papers:

  • "Collecting large-scale publication data at the level of individual researchers: a practical proposal for author name disambiguation" (2020) published in Scientometrics
  • "Impact of Covid-19 on research output by gender across countries" (2022) published in Scientometrics
  • "Comparison of research performance of Italian and Norwegian professors and universities" (2020) published in Journal of Informetrics
  • "The effects of citation-based research evaluation schemes on self-citation behavior" (2021) published in Cineca Institutional Research Information System (Tor Vergata University)
  • "Drivers of academic engagement in public-private research collaboration: an empirical study" (2022) published in Cineca Institutional Research Information System (Tor Vergata University)

Best Publications

  • Research collaboration and productivity: is there correlation?

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo;Flavia Di Costa

  • Data mining emotion in social network communication: Gender differences in MySpace

    Mike Thelwall;David Wilkinson;Sukhvinder Uppal

  • How do you define and measure research productivity

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D'angelo

  • Gender differences in research collaboration

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo;Gianluca Murgia

  • University–industry collaboration in Italy: A bibliometric examination

    Giovanni Abramo;Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo;Flavia Di Costa;Marco Solazzi

  • Evaluating research: from informed peer review to bibliometrics

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo

  • The relationship between scientists' research performance and the degree of internationalization of their research

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo;Marco Solazzi

  • Gender differences in research productivity: A bibliometric analysis of the Italian academic system

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo;Alessandro Caprasecca

  • Allocative efficiency in public research funding: Can bibliometrics help?

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo;Alessandro Caprasecca

  • A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometrics databases for large-scale research assessments

    Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo;Cristiano Giuffrida;Giovanni Abramo

  • The relationship among research productivity, research collaboration, and their determinants

    Giovanni Abramo;Andrea Ciriaco D’Angelo;Gianluca Murgia

  • The measurement of Italian universities’ research productivity by a non parametric-bibliometric methodology

    Giovanni Abramo;Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo;Fabio Pugini

  • University-industry research collaboration: a model to assess university capability

    Giovanni Abramo;Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo;Flavia Di Costa

  • A field-standardized application of DEA to national-scale research assessment of universities

    Giovanni Abramo;Giovanni Abramo;Tindaro Cicero;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo

  • National research assessment exercises: a comparison of peer review and bibliometrics rankings

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo;Flavia Di Costa

  • Assessing the varying level of impact measurement accuracy as a function of the citation window length

    Giovanni Abramo;Giovanni Abramo;Tindaro Cicero;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo

  • Predicting publication long-term impact through a combination of early citations and journal impact factor

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo;Giovanni Felici

  • Research productivity: Are higher academic ranks more productive than lower ones?

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo;Flavia Costa

  • The contribution of star scientists to overall sex differences in research productivity

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo;Alessandro Caprasecca

  • The relationship between the number of authors of a publication, its citations and the impact factor of the publishing journal: Evidence from Italy

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo

  • What is the appropriate length of the publication period over which to assess research performance

    Giovanni Abramo;Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo;Tindaro Cicero

  • A robust benchmark for the h- and g-indexes

    Giovanni Abramo;Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo;Fulvio Viel

Frequent Co-Authors

Giovanni Abramo
Giovanni Abramo Mercatorum University
Cristiano Giuffrida
Cristiano Giuffrida Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Nees Jan van Eck
Nees Jan van Eck Leiden 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 opens many fulfilling career options in counseling, psychology, and family therapy. Many students seek paths that balance flexibility, accreditation, and affordability. Accredited online degrees have become a practical way to launch or advance your career, especially in fields focused on helping others.

For those interested in school counseling, consider the cheapest online school counseling programs (cacrep-accredited). These programs ensure you receive quality education without overwhelming debt. If you’re passionate about supporting families, explore online marriage and family masters programs. These flexible options prepare graduates for growing roles in family therapy.

Psychology is another versatile field, and you can find the most affordable online schools for psychology to start your journey in mental health or organizational behavior. Additionally, if your goal is to help communities through social work, there are easiest msw program opportunities available online, making a meaningful career in social work more accessible than ever.

Best Scientists Citing Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles