World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
35
Citations
6929
World Ranking
9743
National Ranking
5148

David C. Cicero 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 David C. Cicero 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: 86 publications — 11th percentile

11% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

David C. Cicero 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 David C. Cicero 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: 35 D-Index — 16th percentile

16% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

David C. Cicero is affiliated with the University of North Texas in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on psychology, with an emphasis on clinical psychology, psychiatry and mental health, philosophy, experimental and cognitive psychology, and social psychology.

Their scholarly work covers a variety of topics including mental health and psychiatry, personality disorders and psychopathology, mental health research topics, schizophrenia research and treatment, child and adolescent psychosocial and emotional development, psychosomatic disorders and their treatments, as well as mental health treatment and access.

Frequent publication venues for Cicero include Psychological Assessment, Schizophrenia Research, Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, Assessment, and Personality Disorders Theory Research and Treatment.

The scientist has collaborated often with other researchers such as Camilo J. Ruggero, Roman Kotov, Leonard J. Simms, Aidan G.C. Wright, and Katherine Jonas.

Examples of recent significant papers include:

  • The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): A Quantitative Nosology Based on Consensus of Evidence, 2021, Annual Review of Clinical Psychology
  • The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) in psychiatric practice and research, 2022, Psychological Medicine
  • Development of Measures for the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): A Collaborative Scale Development Project, 2021, Assessment
  • Rethinking the Diagnosis of Mental Disorders: Data-Driven Psychological Dimensions, Not Categories, as a Framework for Mental-Health Research, Treatment, and Training, 2021, Current Directions in Psychological Science
  • Principles and procedures for revising the hierarchical taxonomy of psychopathology., 2023, Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science

Best Publications

  • Many Labs 2: Investigating Variation in Replicability Across Samples and Settings

    Richard A. Klein;Michelangelo Vianello;Fred Hasselman;Byron G. Adams

  • Many Labs 3: Evaluating participant pool quality across the academic semester via replication

    Charles R. Ebersole;Olivia E. Atherton;Aimee L. Belanger;Hayley M. Skulborstad

  • Progress in achieving quantitative classification of psychopathology

    Robert F. Krueger;Roman Kotov;David Watson;Miriam K. Forbes

  • The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): A Quantitative Nosology Based on Consensus of Evidence.

    Roman Kotov;Robert F. Krueger;David Watson;David C. Cicero

  • A Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology Can Transform Mental Health Research

    Christopher C. Conway;Miriam K. Forbes;Kelsie T. Forbush;Eiko I. Fried

  • The time has come for dimensional personality disorder diagnosis

    Christopher J. Hopwood;Roman Kotov;Robert F. Krueger;David Watson

  • Integrating the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) into clinical practice

    Camilo J. Ruggero;Roman Kotov;Christopher J. Hopwood;Michael First

  • The Aberrant Salience Inventory: A new measure of psychosis proneness.

    David C. Cicero;John G. Kerns;Denis M. McCarthy

  • Criterion A of the AMPD in HiTOP

    Thomas A. Widiger;Bo Bach;Michael Chmielewski;Lee Anna Clark

  • Are fit indices used to test psychopathology structure biased? A simulation study.

    Ashley L. Greene;Nicholas R. Eaton;Kaiqiao Li;Miriam K. Forbes

  • The structure of schizotypal personality traits: a cross-national study

    E. Fonseca-Pedrero;Martin Debbané;Martin Debbané;J. Ortuño-Sierra;R. C. K. Chan

  • The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) in psychiatric practice and research

    Unknown

  • Positive affect, intuition, and feelings of meaning.

    Joshua A. Hicks;David C. Cicero;Jason Trent;Chad M. Burton

  • Are there developmentally limited forms of bipolar disorder

    David C. Cicero;Amee J. Epler;Kenneth J. Sher

  • Psychometric Properties of the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q): A Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Assessment of Measurement Invariance by Sex.

    Devin Rand-Giovannetti;David C. Cicero;Jonathan M. Mond;Janet D. Latner

  • The Network Structure of Schizotypal Personality Traits

    Eduardo Fonseca-Pedrero;Javier Ortuño;Martin Debbané;Martin Debbané;Raymond C K Chan

  • Development of Measures for the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP): A Collaborative Scale Development Project:

    Leonard J. Simms;Aidan G. C. Wright;David Cicero;Roman Kotov

  • The role of aberrant salience and self-concept clarity in psychotic-like experiences.

    David C. Cicero;Theresa M. Becker;Elizabeth A. Martin;Anna R. Docherty

  • Correspondence between psychometric and clinical high risk for psychosis in an undergraduate population.

    David C. Cicero;Elizabeth A. Martin;Theresa M. Becker;Anna R. Docherty

  • Common Taxonomy of Traits and Symptoms: Linking Schizophrenia Symptoms, Schizotypy, and Normal Personality.

    David C Cicero;Katherine G Jonas;Kaiqiao Li;Greg Perlman

  • Brief assessment of schizotypal traits: A multinational study.

    Eduardo Fonseca-Pedrero;Javier Ortuño-Sierra;Beatriz Lucas-Molina;Martin Debbané

  • Integrating Psychotherapy With the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP)

    Christopher J. Hopwood;R. Michael Bagby;Tara Gralnick;Eunyoe Ro

  • The Inventory of Psychotic-Like Anomalous Self-Experiences (IPASE): Development and validation.

    David C. Cicero;Aaron M. Neis;Mallory J. Klaunig;Christi L. Trask

  • Many Labs 2: Investigating Variation in Replicability Across Sample and Setting

    Unknown

Frequent Co-Authors

John G. Kerns
John G. Kerns University of Missouri
Roman Kotov
Roman Kotov Stony Brook University
Robert F. Krueger
Robert F. Krueger University of Minnesota
Aidan G. C. Wright
Aidan G. C. Wright University of Pittsburgh
Camilo J. Ruggero
Camilo J. Ruggero University of North Texas
Nicholas R. Eaton
Nicholas R. Eaton Stony Brook University
Christopher C. Conway
Christopher C. Conway Fordham University
Christopher J. Patrick
Christopher J. Patrick Florida State University
Stephanie N. Mullins-Sweatt
Stephanie N. Mullins-Sweatt Oklahoma State University
David Watson
David Watson University of Notre Dame

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 psychology degrees in the USA opens many diverse pathways—both academic and professional. Psychology is a rapidly evolving field, and online programs offer affordable, flexible options to start or advance your education from anywhere. Many top universities provide virtual learning experiences that are equal in value to their campus-based counterparts.

Choosing the right program depends on your location, career goals, and preferred areas of study. Students in Texas can compare best psychology degree programs ranking in Waco to find top local options. For those in the capital, consider the best psychology program rankings in Washington, D.C. If you are located in Kansas, reviewing the top psychology degrees in Wichita can help you find the right fit. Students in Wyoming should consult the best psychology degree programs ranking in Wyoming for tailored options.

An online psychology degree can lead to careers in counseling, organizational psychology, research, or further studies such as clinical training. With so many choices available, thorough research is essential to select a program that aligns with your aspirations and state licensure requirements.

Best Scientists Citing David C. Cicero

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles