World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Daniel N. Osherson

Daniel N. Osherson

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
48
Citations
12210
World Ranking
5849
National Ranking
3175

Daniel N. Osherson 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 Daniel N. Osherson 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: 147 publications — 47th percentile

47% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Daniel N. Osherson 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 Daniel N. Osherson 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: 48 D-Index — 49th percentile

49% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Daniel N. Osherson is affiliated with Princeton University in the United States. Their academic profile reflects a focus within the domain of psychology, cognitive science, or related research fields associated with Princeton University, although specific fields of study or subfields are not detailed in the available data.

There are no recent published papers or a listing of titles, years, or publication venues associated with their work in the provided information. Consequently, no details about their recent contributions to the academic literature can be presented.

The profile does not include data on frequent co-authors, which suggests that either collaborations are not recorded here or are minimal in scope for the purposes of this summary. The absence of noted frequent publication venues also means there is no indication of specific journals or conferences that are regularly associated with their work.

Information concerning book publications or the number of books published with particular publishers is not available. Similarly, the dataset does not list core research topics or detailed thematic areas related to their research interests.

Details about awards or professional recognitions are also not recorded, and no information points to any academic honors earned during their career.

The scientist is currently living, based on the available information.

Best Publications

  • Category-Based Induction

    Daniel N. Osherson;Edward E. Smith;Ormond Wilkie;Alejandro López

  • On the adequacy of prototype theory as a theory of concepts.

    Daniel N. Osherson;Edward E. Smith

  • An Invitation to cognitive science

    E. E. Smith;D. N. Osherson

  • Systems That Learn: An Introduction to Learning Theory for Cognitive and Computer Scientists

    Daniel N. Osherson;Michael Stob;Scott Weinstein

  • Systems That Learn: An Introduction to Learning Theory

    James S. Royer;Sanjay Jain;Arun Sharma;Daniel N. Osherson

  • Combining prototypes: A selective modification model.

    Edward E. Smith;Daniel N. Osherson;Lance J. Rips;Margaret Keane

  • Conceptual Combination with Prototype Concepts

    Edward E. Smith;Daniel N. Osherson

  • Gradedness and conceptual combination

    Daniel N. Osherson;Edward E. Smith

  • Combining Prototypes: A Selective Modification Model

    Unknown

  • Typicality and reasoning fallacies

    Eldar B. Shafir;Edward E. Smith;Daniel N. Osherson

  • Distinct brain loci in deductive versus probabilistic reasoning

    Daniel Osherson;Daniela Perani;Stefano Cappa;Tatiana Schnur

  • New Evidence for Distinct Right and Left Brain Systems for Deductive versus Probabilistic Reasoning

    Lawrence M. Parsons;Daniel Osherson

  • The conjunction fallacy: a misunderstanding about conjunction?

    Katya Tentori;Nicolao Bonini;Daniel N. Osherson

  • Thought Beyond Language Neural Dissociation of Algebra and Natural Language

    Martin M. Monti;Lawrence M. Parsons;Daniel N. Osherson

  • On the reality of the conjunction fallacy.

    Ashley Sides;Daniel Osherson;Nicolao Bonini;Riccardo Viale

  • An advantage model of choice

    Eldar B. Shafir;Daniel N. Osherson;Edward E. Smith

  • Persistent differences in patterns of brain activation after sports-related concussion: a longitudinal functional magnetic resonance imaging study.

    Annegret Dettwiler;Murali Murugavel;Margot Putukian;Valerie Cubon

  • The boundaries of language and thought in deductive inference

    Martin M. Monti;Lawrence M. Parsons;Daniel N. Osherson

  • Logical abilities in children

    Daniel N. Osherson

  • Functional neuroanatomy of deductive inference: a language-independent distributed network.

    Martin M. Monti;Daniel N. Osherson;Michael J. Martinez;Lawrence M. Parsons

  • Default Probability

    Daniel N. Osherson;Joshua Stern;Ormond Wilkie;Michael Stob

  • On the psychology of vague predicates

    Nicolao Bonini;Daniel Osherson;Riccardo Viale;Timothy Williamson

  • Delinquency and Learning Disabilities

    Annemaree Carroll;Stephen Houghton

Frequent Co-Authors

Edward E. Smith
Edward E. Smith Columbia University
Eldar Shafir
Eldar Shafir Princeton University
Martin M. Monti
Martin M. Monti University of California, Los Angeles
Sanjeev R. Kulkarni
Sanjeev R. Kulkarni Princeton University
Lawrence M. Parsons
Lawrence M. Parsons University of Sheffield
H. Vincent Poor
H. Vincent Poor Princeton University
Andrew J. Martin
Andrew J. Martin University of New South Wales
Alexander Todorov
Alexander Todorov University of Chicago
Michelle G. Craske
Michelle G. Craske University of California, Los Angeles

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 a degree in psychology in the USA opens up a range of related online degrees and diverse career pathways, especially in the field of social work. Many students choose to further specialize and become licensed social workers, which requires meeting specific criteria depending on the state.

For example, becoming a social worker in Kentucky involves completing a CSWE-accredited program, accumulating supervised hours, and passing relevant exams. Similarly, students interested in becoming a social worker in Louisiana must fulfill coursework requirements and obtain state licensure.

Each state has unique regulations and pathways. If you're curious about the requirements to be a social worker in Maine, you'll need to consider both academic credentials and post-graduation experience. Likewise, becoming a social worker in Maryland also requires state-specific training and passing board exams.

Online degrees allow greater flexibility for students balancing studies with work or family responsibilities. Understanding each state’s social work licensure requirements can help you choose the right educational pathway and career destination to suit your professional goals in psychology and related fields.

Best Scientists Citing Daniel N. Osherson

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles