World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Geert Jan J. M. Stams

Geert Jan J. M. Stams

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Psychology 66 2688 2462 141 135 326 18164

Geert Jan J. M. Stams publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Geert Jan J. M. Stams between 1996 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Geert Jan J. M. Stams published across 30 years, from 1996 to 2025, averaging 13.7 papers a year. Output peaked at 39 publications in 2016. 18 of the 412 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1996 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 39. Peak 39 publications in 2016. 1996: 5 publications 1997: 0 publications 1998: 2 publications 1999: 1 publication 2000: 1 publication 2001: 5 publications 2002: 2 publications 2003: 0 publications 2004: 3 publications 2005: 2 publications 2006: 5 publications 2007: 4 publications 2008: 18 publications 2009: 8 publications 2010: 13 publications 2011: 28 publications 2012: 23 publications 2013: 24 publications 2014: 35 publications 2015: 21 publications 2016: 39 publications 2017: 24 publications 2018: 39 publications 2019: 26 publications 2020: 24 publications 2021: 31 publications 2022: 7 publications 2023: 4 publications 2024: 11 publications 2025: 7 publications
1996 2025

412 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Geert Jan J. M. Stams: publications per year, 1996 to 2025
Year Publications
1996 5
1997 0
1998 2
1999 1
2000 1
2001 5
2002 2
2003 0
2004 3
2005 2
2006 5
2007 4
2008 18
2009 8
2010 13
2011 28
2012 23
2013 24
2014 35
2015 21
2016 39
2017 24
2018 39
2019 26
2020 24
2021 31
2022 7
2023 4
2024 11
2025 7
Total 412
Download as CSV

Geert Jan J. M. Stams 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 Geert Jan J. M. Stams 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, 321–330 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: 326 publications — 90th percentile

90% 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
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 76 326
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

Geert Jan J. M. Stams 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 Geert Jan J. M. Stams 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, 66–67 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: 66 D-Index — 77th percentile

77% 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
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 66
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

Overview

Geert Jan J. M. Stams is affiliated with the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands. Their research primarily spans the fields of Psychology and Social Sciences, with a focus on Clinical Psychology, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science, Safety Research, and General Health Professions.

Their work addresses key topics including Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development, Child Abuse and Trauma, Family and Disability Support Research, Child Welfare and Adoption, Homelessness and Social Issues, Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression, as well as Resilience and Mental Health.

Among recent papers authored or coauthored by Stams are several meta-analyses and systematic reviews published between 2020 and 2022. Notable publications include:

  • Music therapy for stress reduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2020), published in Health Psychology Review
  • Risk factors for (violent) radicalization in juveniles: A multilevel meta-analysis (2020), published in Aggression and Violent Behavior
  • A Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of EMDR and TF-CBT in Reducing Trauma Symptoms and Externalizing Behavior Problems in Adolescents (2021), published in International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology
  • A Meta-Analysis on Differences and Associations between Alliance Ratings in Child and Adolescent Psychotherapy (2022), published in Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology
  • The outcome of non-residential youth care compared to residential youth care: A multilevel meta-analysis (2020), published in Children and Youth Services Review

They frequently collaborate with other researchers whose contributions appear consistently in their bibliographic record. Frequent coauthors include Mark Assink, Peer van der Helm, Levi van Dam, Jesse Roest, and Claudia E. van der Put.

The most common venues for their publications are:

  • International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology
  • Children and Youth Services Review
  • Child Abuse & Neglect
  • Aggression and Violent Behavior
  • Clinical Psychology Review

Best Publications

  • The relations between parents' Big Five personality factors and parenting: a meta-analytic review

    Peter Prinzie;Geert Jan J. M. Stams;Maja Deković;Albert H. A. Reijntjes

  • A meta-analysis of attachment to parents and delinquency.

    Machteld Hoeve;Geert Jan J. M. Stams;Claudia E. van der Put;Judith Semon Dubas

  • Research Review: The relation between child and parent anxiety and parental control: a meta-analytic review

    Corine O. Van Der Bruggen;Geert Jan J.M. Stams;Susan M. Bögels

  • The moral judgment of juvenile delinquents: a meta-analysis.

    Geert Jan Stams;Daniel Brugman;Maja Deković;Lenny van Rosmalen

  • Maternal sensitivity, infant attachment, and temperament in early childhood predict adjustment in middle childhood: the case of adopted children and their biologically unrelated parents.

    Geert-Jan J. M. Stams;Femmie Juffer;Marinus H. van IJzendoorn

  • The relation between pointing and language development: A meta-analysis

    Cristina Colonnesi;Geert Jan J.M. Stams;Irene Koster;Marc J. Noom

  • Effects of music interventions on stress-related outcomes: A systematic review and two meta-analyses

    Martina de Witte;Anouk Spruit;Susan van Hooren;Susan van Hooren;Xavier Moonen;Xavier Moonen

  • The Relation Between Insecure Attachment and Child Anxiety: A Meta-Analytic Review

    Cristina Colonnesi;Evalijn M. Draijer;Geert Jan J. M. Stams;Corine O. Van der Bruggen

  • Mind matters: A meta-analysis on parental mentalization and sensitivity as predictors of infant-parent attachment.

    Moniek A. J. Zeegers;Cristina Colonnesi;Geert-Jan J. M. Stams;Elizabeth Meins

  • The effectiveness of Multisystemic Therapy (MST): A meta-analysis

    Trudy van der Stouwe;Jessica J. Asscher;Geert Jan J.M. Stams;Maja Deković

  • Risk factors for child neglect: A meta-analytic review

    Tim M. Mulder;Kimberly C. Kuiper;Claudia E. van der Put;Geert-Jan J.M. Stams

  • Risk factors for persistent delinquent behavior among juveniles: a meta-analytic review

    Mark Assink;Claudia E. van der Put;Machteld Hoeve;Sanne L. A. de Vries

  • Child negative emotionality and parenting from infancy to preschool: a meta-analytic review.

    Marja C. Paulussen-Hoogeboom;Geert Jan J. M. Stams;Jo M. A. Hermanns;Thea T. D. Peetsma

  • The Effects of Youth Mentoring Programs: A Meta-analysis of Outcome Studies.

    Elizabeth B Raposa;Jean Rhodes;Geert Jan J M Stams;Noel Card

  • Efficacy of EMDR in children: a meta-analysis

    Roos Rodenburg;Anja Benjamin;Carlijn de Roos;Ann Marie Meijer

  • Psychopathology in Children with Epilepsy: A Meta-Analysis

    Roos Rodenburg;Geert Jan Stams;Anne Marie Meijer;Albert P. Aldenkamp

  • Music therapy for stress reduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Martina de Witte;Ana da Silva Pinho;Geert Jan Stams;Xavier Moonen

  • Risk factors for child sexual abuse victimization: A meta-analytic review.

    Mark Assink;Claudia E. van der Put;Mandy W. C. M. Meeuwsen;Nynke M. de Jong

  • The effects of physical activity interventions on psychosocial outcomes in adolescents: A meta-analytic review.

    Anouk Spruit;Mark Assink;Eveline van Vugt;Claudia van der Put

  • The relation between empathy and offending: A meta-analysis

    M.A.M. van Langen;I.B. Wissink;E.S. van Vugt;T. Van der Stouwe

  • The Development and Adjustment of 7-year-old Children Adopted in Infancy

    Geert-Jan J. M. Stams;Femmie Juffer;Jan Rispens;René A. C. Hoksbergen

  • The Contribution of Organized Youth Sport to Antisocial and Prosocial Behavior in Adolescent Athletes

    Esther A. Rutten;Geert Jan J. M. Stams;Gert J. J. Biesta;Carlo Schuengel

Frequent Co-Authors

Jessica J. Asscher
Jessica J. Asscher University of Amsterdam
Machteld Hoeve
Machteld Hoeve University of Amsterdam
Maja Deković
Maja Deković Utrecht University
Carlo Schuengel
Carlo Schuengel Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Gert Biesta
Gert Biesta National University of Ireland, Maynooth
Robert Vermeiren
Robert Vermeiren Leiden University Medical Center
Peter Prinzie
Peter Prinzie Erasmus University Rotterdam
Femmie Juffer
Femmie Juffer Leiden University
Susan M. Bögels
Susan M. Bögels University of Amsterdam

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 a degree in psychology opens doors to a variety of rewarding career paths in mental health, counseling, and therapy. Many students are now opting for online degrees due to their flexibility, allowing them to balance coursework with personal commitments. This can be especially valuable as you prepare for advanced roles in the field.

If your goal is to become a licensed therapist, it’s important to understand specific requirements in different locations. For instance, the path to how to become a licensed therapist in Charlotte may differ from other cities. Likewise, those interested in the Chesapeake licensed therapist requirements or the Chicago licensed therapist education requirements should review local guidelines and licensure essentials.

Many states and cities have unique steps for licensure. For future therapists in California, reviewing the Chula Vista licensed therapist requirements can provide insight into coursework and supervised experience requirements. Online degrees can help you meet these regulations while maintaining your current lifestyle.

Best Scientists Citing Geert Jan J. M. Stams

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles