World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Derek J. Koehler

Derek J. Koehler

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
34
Citations
7803
World Ranking
10049
National Ranking
700

Derek J. Koehler 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 Derek J. Koehler 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: 103 publications — 22nd percentile

22% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Derek J. Koehler 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 Derek J. Koehler 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: 34 D-Index — 13th percentile

13% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Derek J. Koehler is affiliated with the University of Waterloo in Canada. Their research primarily focuses on areas within the social sciences, with a strong emphasis on decision-making processes and behavioral economics.

The main fields of study for Koehler include social sciences, with subfields covering sociology and political science, cognitive neuroscience, general decision sciences, artificial intelligence, and communication. This multidisciplinary approach reflects a wide scope in understanding human behavior and decision-making mechanisms.

Koehler's research topics encompass:

  • Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
  • Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Social Media and Politics

The scientist has published frequently in several academic venues, including:

  • Judgment and Decision Making
  • Cognition
  • Technology Mind and Behavior
  • Journal of Gambling Studies
  • SSRN Electronic Journal

Recent notable papers by Derek J. Koehler include:

  • On the belief that beliefs should change according to evidence: Implications for conspiratorial, moral, paranormal, political, religious, and science beliefs (2020, Judgment and Decision Making)
  • Controlling the narrative: Euphemistic language affects judgments of actions while avoiding perceptions of dishonesty (2021, Cognition)
  • Reducing the number of non-naïve participants in Mechanical Turk samples (2020, Methods in Psychology)
  • Inducing feelings of ignorance makes people more receptive to expert (economist) opinion (2020, Judgment and Decision Making)
  • Distributed metacognition: Increased bias and deficits in metacognitive sensitivity when retrieving information from the internet (2021, Technology Mind and Behavior)

Frequent collaborators of Koehler include:

  • Jonathan A. Fugelsang
  • Alexander C. Walker
  • Ethan Andrew Meyers
  • Madison Stange
  • Mike J. Dixon

Best Publications

  • Support theory: A nonextensional representation of subjective probability.

    Amos Tversky;Derek J. Koehler

  • Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making

    Derek J. Koehler;Nigel Harvey

  • Explanation, imagination, and confidence in judgment.

    Derek J. Koehler

  • On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit

    Gordon Pennycook;James Allan Cheyne;Nathaniel Barr;Derek J. Koehler

  • Analytic cognitive style predicts religious and paranormal belief.

    Gordon Pennycook;James Allan Cheyne;Paul Seli;Derek J. Koehler

  • What makes us think? A three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement.

    Gordon Pennycook;Jonathan A. Fugelsang;Derek J. Koehler

  • Everyday Consequences of Analytic Thinking

    Gordon Pennycook;Jonathan A. Fugelsang;Derek J. Koehler

  • Overconfidence in Probability and Frequency Judgments: A Critical Examination

    Lyle A. Brenner;Derek J. Koehler;Varda Liberman;Amos Tversky

  • Atheists and Agnostics Are More Reflective than Religious Believers: Four Empirical Studies and a Meta-Analysis.

    Gordon Pennycook;Robert M. Ross;Derek J. Koehler;Jonathan A. Fugelsang

  • Dunning-Kruger effects in reasoning: Theoretical implications of the failure to recognize incompetence.

    Gordon Pennycook;Robert M. Ross;Robert M. Ross;Derek J. Koehler;Jonathan A. Fugelsang

  • People focus on optimistic scenarios and disregard pessimistic scenarios while predicting task completion times.

    Ian R. Newby-Clark;Michael Ross;Roger Buehler;Derek J. Koehler

  • Cognitive style and religiosity: the role of conflict detection.

    Gordon Pennycook;James Allan Cheyne;Nathaniel Barr;Derek J. Koehler

  • Is the cognitive reflection test a measure of both reflection and intuition

    Gordon Pennycook;James Allan Cheyne;Derek J. Koehler;Jonathan A. Fugelsang

  • The calibration of expert judgment: Heuristics and biases beyond the laboratory.

    Derek J. Koehler;Lyle Brenner;Dale Griffin

  • Probability Judgment in Medicine: Discounting Unspecified Possibilities

    Donald A. Redelmeier;Derek J. Koehler;Varda Liberman;Amos Tversky

  • The role of analytic thinking in moral judgements and values

    Gordon Pennycook;James Allan Cheyne;Nathaniel Barr;Derek J. Koehler

  • Hypothesis generation and confidence in judgment

    Derek J. Koehler

  • On the evaluation of one‐sided evidence

    Lyle A. Brenner;Derek J. Koehler;Amos Tversky

  • Can journalistic "false balance" distort public perception of consensus in expert opinion?

    Derek J. Koehler

  • People focus on optimistic scenarios and disregard pessimistic scenarios while predicting task completion times.

    Unknown

  • On the belief that beliefs should change according to evidence: Implications for conspiratorial, moral, paranormal, political, religious, and science beliefs

    Unknown

  • Self-predictions overweight strength of current intentions

    Derek J. Koehler;Connie S.K. Poon

  • Belief bias during reasoning among religious believers and skeptics.

    Gordon Pennycook;James Allan Cheyne;Derek J. Koehler;Jonathan A. Fugelsang

  • Probability matching in choice under uncertainty: intuition versus deliberation.

    Derek J. Koehler;Greta James

Frequent Co-Authors

Jonathan A. Fugelsang
Jonathan A. Fugelsang University of Waterloo
Gordon Pennycook
Gordon Pennycook Cornell University
Amos Tversky
Amos Tversky Stanford University
Mike J. Dixon
Mike J. Dixon University of Waterloo
Dale Griffin
Dale Griffin University of British Columbia
Ben R. Newell
Ben R. Newell University of New South Wales
Evan F. Risko
Evan F. Risko University of Waterloo
Richard Gonzalez
Richard Gonzalez University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Valerie A. Thompson
Valerie A. Thompson University of Saskatchewan
Paul Seli
Paul Seli Duke University

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

Studying psychology in the USA can open doors to a wide range of online degrees and rewarding career pathways. Many students choose to further their education by specializing in applied fields, such as behavior analysis. Becoming a Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA) is a popular choice that requires meeting specific educational and certification requirements.

Requirements can differ depending on location. For example, you might want to learn about bcba certification requirements in Charlotte or discover the steps for bcba certification requirements in Chesapeake. Each city may have unique licensure processes, educational prerequisites, and supervised experience requirements.

If you are considering different regions, it’s helpful to review the Chicago bcba education requirements and see what is involved in becoming a bcba in Chula Vista. With many universities now offering flexible online programs, you can tailor your academic path and prepare for meaningful roles in mental health, education, or clinical settings.

Best Scientists Citing Derek J. Koehler

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles