World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Psychology 43 7274 6783 42 37 149 7494

Danny Osborne publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Danny Osborne between 2007 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Danny Osborne published across 19 years, from 2007 to 2025, averaging 11.8 papers a year. Output peaked at 30 publications in 2025. 53 of the 225 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2007 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 30. Peak 30 publications in 2025. 2007: 1 publication 2008: 1 publication 2009: 1 publication 2010: 1 publication 2011: 2 publications 2012: 7 publications 2013: 10 publications 2014: 8 publications 2015: 18 publications 2016: 11 publications 2017: 10 publications 2018: 13 publications 2019: 19 publications 2020: 20 publications 2021: 16 publications 2022: 17 publications 2023: 17 publications 2024: 23 publications 2025: 30 publications
2007 2025

225 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Danny Osborne: publications per year, 2007 to 2025
Year Publications
2007 1
2008 1
2009 1
2010 1
2011 2
2012 7
2013 10
2014 8
2015 18
2016 11
2017 10
2018 13
2019 19
2020 20
2021 16
2022 17
2023 17
2024 23
2025 30
Total 225
Download as CSV

Danny Osborne 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 Danny Osborne 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, 141–150 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: 149 publications — 49th percentile

49% 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
81–90 605
91–100 713
101–110 736
111–120 686
121–130 670
131–140 644
141–150 597 149
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

Danny Osborne 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 Danny Osborne 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, 42–43 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: 43 D-Index — 38th percentile

38% 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
34–35 671
36–37 659
38–39 641
40–41 671
42–43 617 43
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

Danny Osborne is affiliated with the University of Auckland in New Zealand. Their research spans the fields of Social Sciences and Psychology, with a particular focus on Sociology and Political Science, Social Psychology, Gender Studies, Political Science and International Relations, and Health.

Their scholarly work covers several key topics, including:

  • Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Cultural Differences and Values
  • Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Gender Politics and Representation
  • Health disparities and outcomes
  • Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Racial and Ethnic Identity Research

Some recent notable publications by Danny Osborne include:

  • "The psychological causes and societal consequences of authoritarianism," 2023, Nature Reviews Psychology
  • "Abortion Attitudes: An Overview of Demographic and Ideological Differences," 2022, Political Psychology

In addition, Osborne's work appears alongside influential studies such as "Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide lockdown on trust, attitudes toward government, and well-being," published in 2020 in American Psychologist, reflecting interdisciplinary engagement.

Their frequent collaborators reflect a network of research partnerships spanning several experts, including:

  • Chris G. Sibley
  • Kieren J. Lilly
  • Nicole Satherley
  • Elena Zubielevitch
  • Taciano L. Milfont

Typography of publication venues frequently hosting Osborne's work highlights contributions to:

  • European Journal of Social Psychology
  • British Journal of Social Psychology
  • Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
  • Journal of Environmental Psychology
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

This publication pattern signifies a sustained engagement with journals that specialize in social and psychological research. Osborne's body of work positions them within ongoing academic conversations around political attitudes, identity, social behavior, and well-being, intersecting with broader societal issues such as authoritarianism and reproductive politics.

Best Publications

  • Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and nationwide lockdown on trust, attitudes toward government, and well-being.

    Chris G. Sibley;Lara M. Greaves;Nicole Satherley;Marc S. Wilson

  • Teachers' explicit expectations and implicit prejudiced attitudes to educational achievement: Relations with student achievement and the ethnic achievement gap

    E.R. Peterson;C. Rubie-Davies;D. Osborne;C. Sibley

  • Personality and political orientation: Meta‐analysis and test of a threat‐constraint model.

    Chris G. Sibley;Danny Osborne;John Duckitt

  • Missing in (Collective) Action: Ideology, System Justification, and the Motivational Antecedents of Two Types of Protest Behavior

    John T. Jost;Julia Becker;Danny Osborne;Vivienne Badaan

  • An Attributional Analysis of Reactions to Poverty: The Political Ideology of the Giver and the Perceived Morality of the Receiver

    Bernard Weiner;Danny Osborne;Udo Rudolph

  • Protesting to challenge or defend the system? A system justification perspective on collective action.

    Danny Osborne;John T. Jost;Julia C. Becker;Vivienne Badaan

  • Through Rose-Colored Glasses System-Justifying Beliefs Dampen the Effects of Relative Deprivation on Well-Being and Political Mobilization

    Danny Osborne;Chris G. Sibley

  • Authoritarianism and National Identity: Examining the Longitudinal Effects of SDO and RWA on Nationalism and Patriotism.

    Daniel Osborne;P Milojev;Christopher Sibley

  • Benevolent Sexism, Attitudes Toward Motherhood, and Reproductive Rights A Multi-Study Longitudinal Examination of Abortion Attitudes

    Yanshu Huang;PG Davies;Christopher Sibley;Daniel Osborne

  • Testing the Social Identity Model of Collective Action Longitudinally and Across Structurally Disadvantaged and Advantaged Groups

    Emma F. Thomas;Elena Zubielevitch;Chris G. Sibley;Danny Osborne

  • Abortion Attitudes: An Overview of Demographic and Ideological Differences

    Unknown

  • Demographic and Psychological Predictors of Panel Attrition: Evidence from the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study

    Nicole Satherley;Petar Milojev;Lara M. Greaves;Yanshu Huang

  • The End of the Solidly Democratic South: The Impressionable-Years Hypothesis

    Danny Osborne;David O. Sears;Nicholas A. Valentino

  • The psychological causes and societal consequences of authoritarianism

    Unknown

  • More Than a Feeling: Discrete Emotions Mediate the Relationship Between Relative Deprivation and Reactions to Workplace Furloughs

    Danny Osborne;Heather J. Smith;Yuen J. Huo

  • News exposure predicts anti-Muslim prejudice.

    JH Shaver;Christopher Sibley;Daniel Osborne;Joseph Bulbulia

  • What Is Central to Political Belief System Networks

    Mark J Brandt;Chris G Sibley;Danny Osborne

  • Perceived discrimination predicts increased support for political rights and life satisfaction mediated by ethnic identity: A longitudinal analysis.

    Samantha Stronge;Nikhil K. Sengupta;Fiona Kate Barlow;Danny Osborne

  • Attitudes towards redistribution and the interplay between perceptions and beliefs about inequality

    Efraín García-Sánchez;Danny Osborne;Guillermo B Willis;Rosa Rodríguez-Bailón

  • “We want you in the Workplace, but only in a Skirt!” Social Dominance Orientation, Gender-Based Affirmative Action and the Moderating Role of Benevolent Sexism

    Gloria Fraser;Danny Osborne;Chris G. Sibley

  • Income and neighbourhood-level inequality predict self-esteem and ethnic identity centrality through individual- and group-based relative deprivation: A multilevel path analysis

    Danny Osborne;Chris G. Sibley;Nikhil Kumar Sengupta

  • Does personality matter? Openness correlates with vote choice, but particularly for politically sophisticated voters

    Danny Osborne;Chris G. Sibley

  • Exploring the Relationship between Homophobia and Participation in Core Sports among High School Students

    Danny Osborne;William E. Wagner

  • The Diversity and Prevalence of Sexual Orientation Self-Labels in a New Zealand National Sample

    Lara M. Greaves;Fiona Kate Barlow;Fiona Kate Barlow;Carol H. J. Lee;Correna M. Matika

Frequent Co-Authors

Chris G. Sibley
Chris G. Sibley University of Auckland
Joseph Bulbulia
Joseph Bulbulia Victoria University of Wellington
Fiona Kate Barlow
Fiona Kate Barlow University of Queensland
Kumar Yogeeswaran
Kumar Yogeeswaran University of Canterbury
Marc S. Wilson
Marc S. Wilson Victoria University of Wellington
Taciano L. Milfont
Taciano L. Milfont University of Waikato
Jennifer Lees-Marshment
Jennifer Lees-Marshment University of Dundee
Nickola C. Overall
Nickola C. Overall University of Auckland
John T. Jost
John T. Jost New York University
John Duckitt
John Duckitt University of Auckland

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 online degrees in psychology offers flexibility and access to diverse career opportunities. One of the most popular pathways is becoming a mental health counselor, a role that is in high demand across the country. Requirements to enter this field can vary depending on your location, so it's important to understand both academic and certification criteria.

For example, if you are interested in working in Colorado, you can review the Aurora mental health counselor certification requirements. Similarly, those aiming to practice in Texas may want to look into how to become a mental health counselor in Austin. Different rules and processes exist in other regions, such as the Bakersfield mental health counselor certification requirements and for those wishing to become a mental health counselor in Baltimore.

As you pursue your psychology degree online, be sure to research local requirements for licensure and explore internships or supervised practice options that may be needed in your region. Doing so will help you chart a more effective career path and ensure that your qualifications are recognized wherever you choose to practice.

Best Scientists Citing Danny Osborne

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles