World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Social Sciences and Humanities

D-Index
47
Citations
21058
World Ranking
3251
National Ranking
1566

Daniel G. Goldstein 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 Daniel G. Goldstein sits on this spectrum.

44–53 publications: 28 scientists 54–63 publications: 61 scientists 64–73 publications: 161 scientists 74–83 publications: 225 scientists 84–93 publications: 302 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 publications 570+

This scientist: 120 publications — 24th percentile

24% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Daniel G. Goldstein 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 Daniel G. Goldstein sits on this spectrum.

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: 261 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: 47 D-Index — 59th percentile

59% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Daniel G. Goldstein is a researcher affiliated with Microsoft in the United States. Their primary field of study is Computer Science, with a focus on subfields including Artificial Intelligence, Information Systems, Sociology and Political Science, Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty, and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology.

Their main research topics span several areas such as:

  • Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Economic and Environmental Valuation
  • Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Topic Modeling
  • Data Visualization and Analytics
  • COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing

Goldstein has published extensively in notable venues. The most frequent publication venues include:

  • SSRN Electronic Journal
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
  • CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
  • AEA Randomized Controlled Trials

Some recent papers that demonstrate the scope of their work are:

  • No reason to expect large and consistent effects of nudge interventions, 2022, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
  • Reducing opinion polarization: Effects of exposure to similar people with differing political views, 2021, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
  • How good is good enough for COVID19 apps? The influence of benefits, accuracy, and privacy on willingness to adopt, 2020, arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Simple Rules to Guide Expert Classifications, 2020, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (Statistics in Society)
  • Math Education with Large Language Models: Peril or Promise?, 2023, SSRN Electronic Journal

Goldstein has collaborated frequently with several other researchers. Their most common co-authors include:

  • Jake M. Hofman (20 papers)
  • David Rothschild (8 papers)
  • Christopher Hoy (3 papers)
  • Lionel Page (3 papers)
  • Philip J. Grossman (3 papers)

Best Publications

  • Reasoning the fast and frugal way: models of bounded rationality.

    Gerd Gigerenzer;Daniel G. Goldstein

  • Do Defaults Save Lives

    Eric J. Johnson;Daniel Goldstein

  • Models of ecological rationality: the recognition heuristic.

    Daniel G. Goldstein;Gerd Gigerenzer

  • Beyond nudges: Tools of a choice architecture

    Eric J. Johnson;Suzanne B. Shu;Benedict G. C. Dellaert;Craig Fox

  • INCREASING SAVING BEHAVIOR THROUGH AGE-PROGRESSED RENDERINGS OF THE FUTURE SELF.

    Hal E . Hershfield;Daniel G . Goldstein;William F . Sharpe;Jesse Fox

  • Manipulating and Measuring Model Interpretability

    Forough Poursabzi-Sangdeh;Daniel G Goldstein;Jake M Hofman;Jennifer Wortman Wortman Vaughan

  • Asymmetric Discounting in Intertemporal Choice A Query-Theory Account

    Elke Weber;Eric Johnson;Kerry Milch;Hannah H. Chang

  • The recognition heuristic: How ignorance makes us smart

    Daniel G. Goldstein;Gerd Gigerenzer

  • The structure of online diffusion networks

    Sharad Goel;Duncan J. Watts;Daniel G. Goldstein

  • Betting on one good reason : The Take the Best heuristic

    Gerd Gigerenzer;Daniel G. Goldstein

  • Partitioning default effects: Why people choose not to choose

    Isaac Dinner;Eric J. Johnson;Daniel G. Goldstein;Kaiya Liu

  • How good are simple heuristics

    Jean Czerlinski;Gerd Gigerenzer;Daniel G. Goldstein

  • Defaults and donation decisions.

    Eric J. Johnson;Daniel G. Goldstein

  • THE SIX MISTAKES EXECUTIVES MAKE IN RISK MANAGEMENT

    Nassim N. Taleb;Daniel G. Goldstein;Mark W. Spitznagel

  • Choice Without Awareness: Ethical and Policy Implications of Defaults

    N. Craig Smith;Daniel G. Goldstein;Eric J. Johnson

  • Nudge Your Customers Toward Better Choices

    Daniel G. Goldstein;Eric J. Johnson;Andreas Herrmann;Mark Heitmann

  • Choosing Outcomes versus Choosing Products: Consumer‐Focused Retirement Investment Advice

    Daniel G. Goldstein;Eric J. Johnson;William F. Sharpe

  • Can ignorance beat the stock market

    Bernhard Borges;Daniel G. Goldstein;Andreas Ortmann;Gerd Gigerenzer

  • Fast and frugal forecasting

    Daniel G. Goldstein;Gerd Gigerenzer

  • The recognition heuristic: A decade of research

    Gerd Gigerenzer;Daniel G. Goldstein

  • The Construction of Preference: Do Defaults Save Lives?

    Eric J. Johnson;Daniel G. Goldstein

Frequent Co-Authors

Gerd Gigerenzer
Gerd Gigerenzer Max Planck Institute for Human Development
Benedict G. C. Dellaert
Benedict G. C. Dellaert Erasmus University Rotterdam
Sharad Goel
Sharad Goel Harvard University
Elke U. Weber
Elke U. Weber Princeton University
John W. Payne
John W. Payne Duke University
Ellen Peters
Ellen Peters University of Oregon
Anja S. Göritz
Anja S. Göritz University of Freiburg
Richard P. Larrick
Richard P. Larrick Duke University
Craig R. Fox
Craig R. Fox University of California, Los Angeles
Jörg Rieskamp
Jörg Rieskamp University of Basel

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

If you’re considering advancing your studies or changing careers in Social Sciences and Humanities, online degree programs offer flexible and accessible options. Each pathway has unique considerations regarding affordability, entry requirements, and professional outcomes.

Cost is a major factor for many students, so researching the psychology degree cost of different programs is essential. Look for affordable programs without sacrificing accreditation or academic quality.

For students interested in social work, it’s helpful to explore the msw degree options that are easiest to get into, ensuring a smoother admission process without compromising your future career prospects.

Those aiming for clinical psychology roles may consider pursuing an online psyd to gain the hands-on, practical training needed for licensure.

If working as a marriage and family therapist is your goal, look for programs that fit your timeline with the mft online programs that can be completed efficiently without sacrificing educational depth.

Exploring these online pathways can help you shape a rewarding and viable career in the Social Sciences and Humanities.

Best Scientists Citing Daniel G. Goldstein

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles