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 36 9461 8844 5011 4566 123 6360

Frances K. McSweeney publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Frances K. McSweeney between 1974 and 2017, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Frances K. McSweeney published across 44 years, from 1974 to 2017, averaging 2.8 papers a year. Output peaked at 12 publications in 1996. 1 of the 123 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1974 to 2017. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 12. Peak 12 publications in 1996. 1974: 1 publication 1975: 2 publications 1976: 1 publication 1977: 2 publications 1978: 4 publications 1979: 2 publications 1980: 1 publication 1981: 2 publications 1982: 1 publication 1983: 4 publications 1984: 1 publication 1985: 4 publications 1986: 6 publications 1987: 5 publications 1988: 2 publications 1989: 1 publication 1990: 0 publications 1991: 3 publications 1992: 3 publications 1993: 3 publications 1994: 3 publications 1995: 9 publications 1996: 12 publications 1997: 3 publications 1998: 6 publications 1999: 5 publications 2000: 2 publications 2001: 8 publications 2002: 3 publications 2003: 6 publications 2004: 7 publications 2005: 3 publications 2006: 1 publication 2007: 0 publications 2008: 1 publication 2009: 2 publications 2010: 0 publications 2011: 0 publications 2012: 0 publications 2013: 0 publications 2014: 2 publications 2015: 1 publication 2016: 0 publications 2017: 1 publication
1974 2017

123 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Frances K. McSweeney: publications per year, 1974 to 2017
Year Publications
1974 1
1975 2
1976 1
1977 2
1978 4
1979 2
1980 1
1981 2
1982 1
1983 4
1984 1
1985 4
1986 6
1987 5
1988 2
1989 1
1990 0
1991 3
1992 3
1993 3
1994 3
1995 9
1996 12
1997 3
1998 6
1999 5
2000 2
2001 8
2002 3
2003 6
2004 7
2005 3
2006 1
2007 0
2008 1
2009 2
2010 0
2011 0
2012 0
2013 0
2014 2
2015 1
2016 0
2017 1
Total 123
Download as CSV

Frances K. McSweeney 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 Frances K. McSweeney 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, 121–130 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: 123 publications — 34th percentile

34% 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
121–130 670 123
131–140 644
141–150 597
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

Frances K. McSweeney 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 Frances K. McSweeney 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, 36–37 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: 36 D-Index — 19th percentile

19% 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 36
38–39 641
40–41 671
42–43 617
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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 1991 - Fellow of the American Psychological Association (APA)

Overview

Frances K. McSweeney is affiliated with Washington State University in the United States. Their professional focus is grounded within this academic institution, contributing to the broader scientific community through research and scholarship.

McSweeney's work has been recognized by the American Psychological Association, having been awarded the title of Fellow in 1991. This distinction marks a significant professional acknowledgment within the field of psychology.

No recent papers, co-authors, publication venues, or specific research topics have been documented in the available data. Similarly, information on book publications, main fields of study, subfields, or main topics of work is not specified. However, the affiliation and award suggest a background in psychological or behavioral sciences.

Best Publications

  • Habituation revisited: an updated and revised description of the behavioral characteristics of habituation.

    Catharine H. Rankin;Thomas Abrams;Robert J. Barry;Seema Bhatnagar

  • Classical Conditioning of Preferences for Stimuli

    Calvin Bierley;Frances K. McSweeney;Renee Vannieuwkerk

  • Recent Developments in Classical Conditioning

    Frances K. McSweeney;Calvin Bierley

  • General-process theories of motivation revisited : The role of habituation

    Frances K. McSweeney;Samantha Swindell

  • Sensitization-habituation may occur during operant conditioning

    Frances K. McSweeney;John M. Hinson;Cari B. Cannon

  • The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Operant and Classical Conditioning

    Frances K. McSweeney;Eric S. Murphy

  • Rate of reinforcement and session duration as determinants of within-session patterns of responding

    Frances K. McSweeney

  • DYNAMIC CHANGES IN REINFORCER EFFECTIVENESS: THEORETICAL, METHODOLOGICAL, AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS FOR APPLIED RESEARCH

    Eric S. Murphy;Frances K. McSweeney;Richard G. Smith;Jennifer J. McComas

  • Common processes may contribute to extinction and habituation.

    Frances K. McSweeney;Samantha Swindell

  • Responding changes systematically within sessions during conditioning procedures.

    Frances K. McSweeney;John M. Roll

  • Sensitization and habituation regulate reinforcer effectiveness

    Frances K. McSweeney;Eric S. Murphy

  • Criticisms of the satiety hypothesis as an explanation for within-session decreases in responding.

    Frances K. McSweeney;Eric S. Murphy

  • Concurrent schedule responding as a function of body weight

    Frances K. McSweeney

  • Do animals satiate or habituate to repeatedly presented reinforcers

    Frances K. Mcsweeney;John M. Roll

  • Prediction of concurrent keypeck treadle-press responding from simple schedule performance

    Frances K. McSweeney

  • Modeling influences on eating behavior

    Barbara Rosenthal;Frances K. McSweeney

  • Habituation of salivation and motivated responding for food in children.

    Leonard H Epstein;Frances G Saad;Elizabeth A Handley;James N Roemmich

  • Patterns of responding within sessions.

    Frances K. McSweeney;John M. Hinson

  • Dynamic changes in reinforcer effectiveness: Satiation and habituation have different implications for theory and practice

    Frances K. McSweeney

  • The generality of within-session patterns of responding: Rate of reinforcement and session length

    Frances K. Mcsweeney;John M. Roll;Cari B. Cannon

  • Within-session responding as a function of post-session feedings

    Frances K. McSweeney;Julie Hatfield;Tammy M. Allen

Frequent Co-Authors

John M. Roll
John M. Roll Washington State University
Larry W. Hawk
Larry W. Hawk University at Buffalo, State University of New York
Gianluca Coppola
Gianluca Coppola Sapienza University of Rome
Chun-Fang Wu
Chun-Fang Wu University of Iowa
Ronald E. See
Ronald E. See Medical University of South Carolina
David L. Glanzman
David L. Glanzman University of California, Los Angeles
Robert J. Barry
Robert J. Barry University of Wollongong
John Colombo
John Colombo University of Kansas
Leonard H. Epstein
Leonard H. Epstein University at Buffalo, State University of New York
David F. Clayton
David F. Clayton Clemson 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 opens up a range of rewarding career options, especially in counseling and mental health services. One in-demand pathway is becoming a substance abuse counselor, with growing opportunities in cities across the country.

Online psychology degrees can pave the way to a fulfilling career in this field. For instance, to learn how to become a substance abuse counselor in Milwaukee, students need to complete specific educational requirements and gain supervised clinical experience. Similarly, substance abuse counselor requirements in Minneapolis emphasize the need for accredited degrees and specialized licensure.

Exploring regional requirements is key. If you are interested in becoming a substance abuse counselor in Nashville, Tennessee’s guidelines focus both on education and practical training hours, while New Orleans substance abuse counselors education requirements highlight certification standards unique to Louisiana.

Online programs offer flexibility and accessibility, preparing students for licensure exams and real-world practice. Understanding the specific criteria in your target state can help you choose the best degree track and career pathway in this growing area of psychology.

Best Scientists Citing Frances K. McSweeney

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles