World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
31
Citations
6547
World Ranking
11090
National Ranking
5797

Edward T. Cokely 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 Edward T. Cokely 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: 88 publications — 13th percentile

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

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

Edward T. Cokely 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 Edward T. Cokely 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: 31 D-Index — 3rd percentile

3% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Edward T. Cokely is affiliated with the University of Oklahoma in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on psychology, with significant contributions to cognitive neuroscience, sociology and political science, clinical psychology, applied psychology, and social psychology.

Thematic concentrations in their work include climate change communication and perception, free will and agency, risk perception and management, behavioral health and interventions, human-automation interaction and safety, occupational health and safety research, and risk and safety analysis.

Frequent collaborators in their research are Adam Feltz, Rocío García-Retamero, Jinhyo Cho, Jinan N. Allan, and Dafina Petrova.

Recent publications by Edward T. Cokely cover a range of topics and venues:

  1. Measuring feelings about choices and risks: The Berlin Emotional Responses to Risk Instrument (BERRI), 2022, Risk Analysis
  2. Numeracy does not polarize climate change judgments: Numerate people are more knowledgeable and knowledge is power., 2023, Decision
  3. Parental Risk Literacy is Related to Quality of Life in Spanish Families of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder, 2020, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
  4. An Eye Tracking Based Framework for Safety Improvement of Offshore Operations, 2023, Journal of Eye Movement Research
  5. Risk Literacy Promotes Representative Understanding: Numerate People are Less Biased, More Knowledgeable, and More Concerned about Climate Change, 2021, Research Square (Research Square)

Edward T. Cokely's work is often published in venues such as PsycTESTS Dataset, Decision, Risk Analysis, Journal of Eye Movement Research, and Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders.

Best Publications

  • The making of an expert.

    K. Anders Ericsson;Michael J. Prietula;Edward T. Cokely

  • Measuring risk literacy: The Berlin numeracy test

    Edward T. Cokely;Mirta Galesic;Eric Schulz;Saima Ghazal

  • Cognitive abilities and superior decision making under risk : A protocol analysis and process model evaluation

    Edward T. Cokely;Colleen M. Kelley

  • Communicating Health Risks With Visual Aids

    Rocio Garcia-Retamero;Edward T. Cokely

  • Designing Visual Aids That Promote Risk Literacy: A Systematic Review of Health Research and Evidence-Based Design Heuristics.

    Rocio Garcia-Retamero;Edward T Cokely

  • Effective communication of risks to young adults: using message framing and visual aids to increase condom use and STD screening.

    Rocio Garcia-Retamero;Edward T. Cokely

  • Predicting biases in very highly educated samples: Numeracy and metacognition

    Saima Ghazal;Edward T. Cokely;Rocio Garcia-Retamero

  • Do judgments about freedom and responsibility depend on who you are? Personality differences in intuitions about compatibilism and incompatibilism.

    Adam Feltz;Edward T. Cokely

  • Individual Differences in Graph Literacy: Overcoming Denominator Neglect in Risk Comprehension

    Yasmina Okan;Rocio Garcia-Retamero;Edward T. Cokely;Antonio Maldonado

  • Persistent bias in expert judgments about free will and moral responsibility: a test of the expertise defense.

    Eric Schulz;Edward T. Cokely;Adam Feltz

  • Using Visual Aids to Improve Communication of Risks about Health: A Review

    Rocio Garcia-Retamero;Yasmina Okan;Edward T. Cokely

  • Sources of individual differences in working memory: contributions of strategy to capacity.

    Edward T. Cokely;Colleen M. Kelley;Amanda L. Gilchrist

  • Individual differences, judgment biases, and theory-of-mind: Deconstructing the intentional action side effect asymmetry

    Edward T. Cokely;Adam Feltz

  • Understanding the harms and benefits of cancer screening: A model of factors that shape informed decision making

    Dafina Petrova;Rocio Garcia-Retamero;Edward T. Cokely;Edward T. Cokely;Edward T. Cokely

  • The fragmented folk : More evidence of stable individual differences in moral judgments and folk intuitions

    Adam Feltz;Edward T. Cokely

  • The Influence of Skills, Message Frame, and Visual Aids on Prevention of Sexually Transmitted Diseases

    Rocio Garcia-Retamero;Edward T. Cokely

  • Skilled decision theory: From intelligence to numeracy and expertise.

    Edward T. Cokely;Adam Feltz;Saima Ghazal;Jinan N. Allan

  • An Anomaly in Intentional Action Ascription: More Evidence of Folk Diversity

    Adam Feltz;Edward T. Cokely

  • Naturalistic Heuristics for Decision Making

    Niklas Keller;Edward T. Cokely;Konstantinos V. Katsikopoulos;Odette Wegwarth

  • The Philosophical Personality Argument

    Adam Feltz;Edward T. Cokely

Frequent Co-Authors

Rocio Garcia-Retamero
Rocio Garcia-Retamero University of Granada
Paul Ward
Paul Ward Torrens University Australia
Gregory D. Myer
Gregory D. Myer Emory University
K. Anders Ericsson
K. Anders Ericsson Florida State University
Mirta Galesic
Mirta Galesic Santa Fe Institute
Wändi Bruine de Bruin
Wändi Bruine de Bruin University of Southern California
Andrés Catena
Andrés Catena University of Granada
Gerd Gigerenzer
Gerd Gigerenzer Max Planck Institute for Human Development
Hank C. Jenkins-Smith
Hank C. Jenkins-Smith University of Oklahoma

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

Pursuing a degree in psychology opens up diverse online study options and career paths, from counseling to specialized behavioral roles. Many students interested in working with individuals with behavior challenges consider becoming a Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA). While a master’s degree in psychology or a related field is usually required, the certification process and specific educational requirements vary by location.

For example, those researching how to become a bcba in Honolulu will find details tailored to Hawaii’s guidelines. Similarly, if you’re evaluating bcba certification requirements in Houston, you’ll discover information on Texas-specific pathways. Students in the southern United States often explore steps for becoming a bcba in Huntsville, while those in the Midwest may need to review Indianapolis bcba education requirements.

Online degree programs in psychology offer flexible learning and help meet coursework requirements for BCBA pathways. No matter where you study, it’s important to research local licensing and certification rules to ensure a smooth journey toward your desired career in psychology and behavioral analysis.

Best Scientists Citing Edward T. Cokely

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles