World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
59
Citations
17895
World Ranking
3652
National Ranking
2051

David M. Messick 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 M. Messick 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: 144 publications — 46th percentile

46% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

David M. Messick 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 M. Messick 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: 59 D-Index — 68th percentile

68% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

David M. Messick is affiliated with Northwestern University in the United States. Their academic profile reflects a focused involvement in research without specific records of recent papers or frequent collaborations based on the available data.

The absence of detailed publication lists, co-authors, and frequent venues suggests that the current accessible data does not provide extensive bibliometric or collaborative insights. This limits the ability to construct a comprehensive overview of their specific scholarly contributions, publication impact, or network of scholarly interaction.

Despite this, the affiliation with Northwestern University indicates engagement within a recognized research institution, which may imply participation in various academic and scientific activities in line with the university's domains of expertise.

There are no recorded awards, book publications, or explicit fields and subfields of study connected to David M. Messick in the available source data. This omission restricts the ability to elaborate on their areas of specialization or recognized achievements in scientific disciplines.

The consulted data also does not identify main topics of research, further limiting a detailed description of their scientific focus or thematic areas.

David M. Messick is currently living, as indicated by the status provided.

Best Publications

  • Motivational bases of choice in experimental games

    David M Messick;Charles G McClintock

  • Sanctioning Systems, Decision Frames, and Cooperation:

    Ann E. Tenbrunsel;David M. Messick

  • Ethical Fading: The Role of Self-Deception in Unethical Behavior

    Ann E. Tenbrunsel;David M. Messick

  • A Conceptual Review of Decision Making in Social Dilemmas: Applying a Logic of Appropriateness

    J. Mark Weber;Shirli Kopelman;David M. Messick

  • INDIVIDUAL ADAPTATIONS AND STRUCTURAL-CHANGE AS SOLUTIONS TO SOCIAL DILEMMAS

    David M. Messick;Henk Wilke;Marilynn B. Brewer;Roderick M. Kramer

  • Why We Are Fairer Than Others

    David M Messick;Suzanne Bloom;Janet P Boldizar;Charles D Samuelson

  • Fairness and preference

    David M. Messick;Keith P. Sentis

  • On Being Better but not Smarter than Others: The Muhammad Ali Effect

    Scott T. Allison;David M. Messick;George R. Goethals

  • Solving social dilemmas: A review.

    David M. Messick;Marilynn B. Brewer

  • Shared Cognition in-Organizations: The Management of Knowledge

    Leigh L. Thompson;David M. Messick;John M. Levine

  • Equality as a decision heuristic.

    David M. Messick

  • Social Decision Heuristics in the Use of Shared Resources

    Scott T. Allison;David M. Messick

  • Social Dilemmas : Theoretical Issues and Research Findings

    Wim B. G. Liebrand;David M. Messick;H. A. M. Wilke

  • The uniqueness bias: Studies of constructive social comparison.

    George R. Goethals;David M. Messick;Scott T. Allison

  • Ethical Leadership and the Psychology of Decision Making

    David M. Messick;Max H. Bazerman

  • Alternative logics for decision making in social settings

    David M. Messick

  • Factors influencing cooperation in commons dilemmas: A review of experimental psychological research.

    Shirli Kopelman;J. Mark Weber;David M. Messick

  • Social values and cooperative response to a simulated resource conservation crisis

    Roderick M Kramer;Charles G McClintock;David M Messick

  • Individual and structural solutions to resource dilemmas in two cultures

    Charles D. Samuelson;David M. Messick;Christel G. Rutte;Henk Wilke

  • A Reverse Outcome Bias: The Influence of Multiple Reference Points on the Evaluation of Outcomes and Decisions

    Terry L. Boles;David M. Messick

  • A framework for social motives.

    Kenneth R. Maccrimmon;David M. Messick

Frequent Co-Authors

Roderick M. Kramer
Roderick M. Kramer Stanford University
Max H. Bazerman
Max H. Bazerman Harvard University
Leigh Thompson
Leigh Thompson Northwestern University
John M. Levine
John M. Levine University of Pittsburgh
George R. Goethals
George R. Goethals University of Richmond
Henk A. M. Wilke
Henk A. M. Wilke Leiden University
Glenn D. Reeder
Glenn D. Reeder Illinois State University
Roberta L. Klatzky
Roberta L. Klatzky Carnegie Mellon University
Marilynn B. Brewer
Marilynn B. Brewer The Ohio State University
James N. Butcher
James N. Butcher University of Minnesota

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

As the field of psychology grows, so do flexible and affordable pathways for earning your degree online. Many reputable universities across the U.S. offer online psychology programs, making it easier for students to balance studies with other commitments while minimizing costs.

Affordability is a central concern for many students. Fortunately, numerous options exist, such as affordable psychology degrees in Louisville, which provide quality education at reduced rates. Those studying in the Midwest may consider the affordable psychology degrees in Minneapolis to find flexible, budget-friendly choices tailored to local demand.

If you are exploring neighboring states, there are most affordable psychology degree programs in Missouri as well as the cheapest psychology programs in North Carolina. Such programs not only make higher education accessible but also prepare graduates for diverse careers, from counseling and social services to research and human resources.

Choosing an affordable, accredited program helps ease student debt and creates opportunities to pursue psychology careers in both traditional and innovative roles.

Best Scientists Citing David M. Messick

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles