World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
49
Citations
13978
World Ranking
5776
National Ranking
2626

Daniel D. Suthers publication distribution in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Computer Science in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Daniel D. Suthers sits on this spectrum.

32–41 publications: 7 scientists 42–51 publications: 22 scientists 52–61 publications: 82 scientists 62–71 publications: 134 scientists 72–81 publications: 249 scientists 82–91 publications: 324 scientists 92–101 publications: 421 scientists 102–111 publications: 420 scientists 112–121 publications: 497 scientists 122–131 publications: 544 scientists 132–141 publications: 555 scientists 142–151 publications: 609 scientists 152–161 publications: 559 scientists 162–171 publications: 534 scientists 172–181 publications: 556 scientists 182–191 publications: 583 scientists 192–201 publications: 519 scientists 202–211 publications: 508 scientists 212–221 publications: 490 scientists 222–231 publications: 437 scientists 232–241 publications: 423 scientists 242–251 publications: 408 scientists 252–261 publications: 377 scientists 262–271 publications: 301 scientists 272–281 publications: 335 scientists 282–291 publications: 320 scientists 292–301 publications: 293 scientists 302–311 publications: 250 scientists 312–321 publications: 238 scientists 322–331 publications: 206 scientists 332–341 publications: 209 scientists 342–351 publications: 208 scientists 352–361 publications: 162 scientists 362–371 publications: 176 scientists 372–381 publications: 127 scientists 382–391 publications: 158 scientists 392–401 publications: 128 scientists 402–411 publications: 104 scientists 412–421 publications: 94 scientists 422–431 publications: 99 scientists 432–441 publications: 83 scientists 442–451 publications: 108 scientists 452–461 publications: 73 scientists 462–471 publications: 77 scientists 472–481 publications: 69 scientists 482–491 publications: 84 scientists 492–501 publications: 62 scientists 502–511 publications: 54 scientists 512–521 publications: 57 scientists 522–531 publications: 51 scientists 532–541 publications: 51 scientists 542–551 publications: 32 scientists 552–561 publications: 38 scientists 562–571 publications: 28 scientists 572–581 publications: 43 scientists 582–591 publications: 33 scientists 592–601 publications: 41 scientists 602–611 publications: 32 scientists 612–621 publications: 28 scientists 622–631 publications: 25 scientists 632–641 publications: 27 scientists 642–651 publications: 17 scientists 652–661 publications: 20 scientists 662–671 publications: 17 scientists 672–681 publications: 15 scientists 682–691 publications: 14 scientists 692–701 publications: 21 scientists 702–711 publications: 13 scientists 712–721 publications: 12 scientists 722–731 publications: 19 scientists 732–741 publications: 14 scientists 742–751 publications: 12 scientists 752–761 publications: 10 scientists 762–771 publications: 10 scientists 772–781 publications: 11 scientists 782–791 publications: 10 scientists 792–801 publications: 11 scientists 802–811 publications: 8 scientists 812–821 publications: 8 scientists 822–831 publications: 7 scientists 832–841 publications: 11 scientists 842–851 publications: 10 scientists 852–861 publications: 5 scientists 862–871 publications: 9 scientists 872–881 publications: 4 scientists 882–891 publications: 6 scientists 892–901 publications: 3 scientists 902–911 publications: 6 scientists 912–921 publications: 3 scientists 922–931 publications: 2 scientists 932–941 publications: 2 scientists 942–951 publications: 2 scientists 952–961 publications: 3 scientists 962–971 publications: 3 scientists 972–981 publications: 3 scientists 982–990 publications: 5 scientists 991+ publications: 100 scientists
32 publications 991+

This scientist: 232 publications — 57th percentile

57% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more.

Daniel D. Suthers D-index placement in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Computer Science scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Daniel D. Suthers sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 879 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 983 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 918 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 990 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 968 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 907 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 821 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 763 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 689 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 543 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 543 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 518 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 500 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 458 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 400 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 337 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 308 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 292 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 249 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 213 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 192 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 189 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 165 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 139 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 119 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 121 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 113 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 88 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 87 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 75 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 69 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 57 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 46 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 38 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 34 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 36 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 27 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 37 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 18 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 31 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 19 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 16 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 20 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 15 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 5 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 20 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 8 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 5 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 7 scientists 130 D-Index: 3 scientists 131+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 49 D-Index — 60th percentile

60% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more.

Overview

Daniel D. Suthers is affiliated with the University of Hawaii at Manoa in the United States. Their research primarily falls within the field of Social Sciences, with a focus on several subfields including Communication, Sociology and Political Science, Economics and Econometrics, Developmental and Educational Psychology, and Human Factors and Ergonomics.

Their scholarly output features investigations into topics related to Social Media and Politics, Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods, Innovative Education and Learning Practices, Online and Blended Learning, Microfinance and Financial Inclusion, FinTech, Crowdfunding, Digital Finance, and ICT Impact and Policies.

Recent publications authored or co-authored by Daniel D. Suthers include:

  • Towards a Systematic Study of Representational Guidance for Collaborative Learning Discourse (2020), published in TUGraz OPEN Library (Graz University of Technology)
  • Mobile Money Networks with Tax-Incentives (2022), published in Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
  • From Affordances to Cultural Affordances: An Analytic Framework for Tracing the Dynamic Interaction among Technology, People and Culture (2023), published in Cultures of Science
  • A Template for Mapping Emotion Expression within Hashtag Publics (2023), published in Communication and the Public
  • Towards a 'Pluralist' Approach for Examining Structures of Interwoven Multimodal Discourse on Social Media (2023), published in New Media & Society

The venues where this work has appeared demonstrate a disciplinary range emphasizing communication, social sciences, and media studies. These venues include:

  • Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
  • Cultures of Science
  • TUGraz OPEN Library (Graz University of Technology)
  • Communication and the Public
  • New Media & Society

Daniel D. Suthers collaborates regularly with several researchers. Frequent coauthors include:

  • Yinan Sun
  • Chamil Rathnayake
  • Gerry Stahl
  • Timothy Koschmann
  • Ivan Rivadeneyra

Best Publications

  • CSCL: An historical perspective.

    Gerry Stahl;Timothy D. Koschmann;Daniel D. Suthers

  • Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective

    Gerry Stahl;Timothy Koschmann;Dan Suthers

  • Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL

    Daniel D. Suthers

  • Arguing to Learn: Confronting Cognitions in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environments

    Jerry Andriessen;Michael Baker;Dan Suthers

  • An Experimental Study of the Effects of Representational Guidance on Collaborative Learning Processes.

    Daniel D. Suthers;Christopher D. Hundhausen

  • Argumentation, Computer Support, and the Educational Context of Confronting Cognitions

    Jerry Andriessen;Michael Baker;Dan Suthers

  • Beyond threaded discussion: Representational guidance in asynchronous collaborative learning environments

    Daniel D Suthers;Ravi Vatrapu;Richard Medina;Samuel Joseph

  • Belvedere: Engaging students in critical discussion of science and public policy issues.

    Daniel D. Suthers;Arlene Weiner;John Connelly;Massimo Paolucci

  • Towards a Systematic Study of Representational Guidance for Collaborative Learning Discourse.

    Daniel D. Suthers

  • A framework for conceptualizing, representing, and analyzing distributed interaction

    Daniel D. Suthers;Nathan Dwyer;Richard Medina;Ravikiran Vatrapu

  • Coaching Web-based Collaborative Learning based on Problem Solution Differences and Participation

    Maria de los Angeles Constantino-Gonzalez;Daniel D. Suthers;José G. Escamilla de los Santos

  • Developing educational software components

    J. Roschelle;C. DiGiano;M. Koutlis;A. Repenning

  • Representational guidance for collaborative inquiry.

    Daniel D. Suthers

  • An integrated approach to implementing collaborative inquiry in the classroom

    Daniel D. Suthers;Eva Erdosne Toth;Arlene Weiner

  • Technology affordances for intersubjective learning: a thematic agenda for CSCL

    Daniel D. Suthers

  • Component-Based Construction of a Science Learning Space

    Kenneth R. Koedinger;Daniel Suthers;Kenneth D. Forbus

  • Learning by Constructing Collaborative Representations: An Empirical Comparison of Three Alternatives.

    Daniel D. Suthers;Christopher D. Hundhausen

  • Collaborative representations: supporting face to face and online knowledge-building discourse

    D.D. Suthers

  • Groupware for developing critical discussion skills

    Dan Suthers;Arlene Weiner

  • Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning

    Gerry Stahl;Timothy Koschmann;Daniel D. Suthers

  • Technology Affordances for Intersubjective Meaning-Making

    Daniel Suthers

Frequent Co-Authors

Christopher D. Hundhausen
Christopher D. Hundhausen Oregon State University
Gerry Stahl
Gerry Stahl Drexel University
Timothy Koschmann
Timothy Koschmann Southern Illinois University School of Medicine
Carolyn Penstein Rosé
Carolyn Penstein Rosé Carnegie Mellon University
Nancy Law
Nancy Law University of Hong Kong
Maarten de Laat
Maarten de Laat University of South Australia
Alan M. Lesgold
Alan M. Lesgold University of Pittsburgh
Caroline Haythornthwaite
Caroline Haythornthwaite Syracuse University
Beverly Park Woolf
Beverly Park Woolf University of Massachusetts Amherst

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 passionate about technology or related fields, pursuing an online degree offers unmatched flexibility and a breadth of career options. For those interested in an accelerated and flexible approach, consider a computer science degree online. These programs provide comprehensive technical training and can lead to careers in software engineering, data science, cybersecurity, and more.

Alternatively, career interests sometimes overlap with other STEM disciplines. For instance, if you’re curious about sustainable solutions or environmental impact, you might explore what can you do with an environmental science major. Graduates often secure roles in conservation, environmental consulting, or research.

Engineering remains one of the most versatile career fields for computer science students. Consider earning an affordable online degree from environmental engineering schools online or explore a reputable online degree for mechanical engineering. Both pathways open doors to innovation in industries ranging from energy to manufacturing.

Best Scientists Citing Daniel D. Suthers

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles