World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Mathematics

D-Index
46
Citations
9920
World Ranking
1344
National Ranking
44

H. J. Keselman publication distribution in Mathematics in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Mathematics in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where H. J. Keselman sits on this spectrum.

42–46 publications: 3 scientists 47–51 publications: 5 scientists 52–56 publications: 7 scientists 57–61 publications: 20 scientists 62–66 publications: 14 scientists 67–71 publications: 25 scientists 72–76 publications: 19 scientists 77–81 publications: 35 scientists 82–86 publications: 50 scientists 87–91 publications: 60 scientists 92–96 publications: 86 scientists 97–101 publications: 84 scientists 102–106 publications: 83 scientists 107–111 publications: 90 scientists 112–116 publications: 99 scientists 117–121 publications: 90 scientists 122–126 publications: 91 scientists 127–131 publications: 109 scientists 132–136 publications: 110 scientists 137–141 publications: 98 scientists 142–146 publications: 112 scientists 147–151 publications: 102 scientists 152–156 publications: 88 scientists 157–161 publications: 106 scientists 162–166 publications: 83 scientists 167–171 publications: 102 scientists 172–176 publications: 77 scientists 177–181 publications: 81 scientists 182–186 publications: 78 scientists 187–191 publications: 71 scientists 192–196 publications: 92 scientists 197–201 publications: 64 scientists 202–206 publications: 69 scientists 207–211 publications: 64 scientists 212–216 publications: 62 scientists 217–221 publications: 58 scientists 222–226 publications: 53 scientists 227–231 publications: 50 scientists 232–236 publications: 46 scientists 237–241 publications: 46 scientists 242–246 publications: 46 scientists 247–251 publications: 43 scientists 252–256 publications: 29 scientists 257–261 publications: 45 scientists 262–266 publications: 30 scientists 267–271 publications: 33 scientists 272–276 publications: 34 scientists 277–281 publications: 30 scientists 282–286 publications: 31 scientists 287–291 publications: 21 scientists 292–296 publications: 34 scientists 297–301 publications: 26 scientists 302–306 publications: 10 scientists 307–311 publications: 17 scientists 312–316 publications: 23 scientists 317–321 publications: 13 scientists 322–326 publications: 16 scientists 327–331 publications: 26 scientists 332–336 publications: 13 scientists 337–341 publications: 13 scientists 342–346 publications: 16 scientists 347–351 publications: 17 scientists 352–356 publications: 12 scientists 357–361 publications: 18 scientists 362–366 publications: 18 scientists 367–371 publications: 9 scientists 372–376 publications: 11 scientists 377–381 publications: 8 scientists 382–386 publications: 8 scientists 387–391 publications: 9 scientists 392–396 publications: 9 scientists 397–401 publications: 8 scientists 402–406 publications: 11 scientists 407–411 publications: 6 scientists 412–416 publications: 6 scientists 417–421 publications: 9 scientists 422–426 publications: 8 scientists 427–431 publications: 5 scientists 432–436 publications: 8 scientists 437–441 publications: 8 scientists 442–446 publications: 4 scientists 447–451 publications: 4 scientists 452–456 publications: 4 scientists 457–461 publications: 2 scientists 462–466 publications: 2 scientists 467–471 publications: 4 scientists 472–476 publications: 3 scientists 477–481 publications: 3 scientists 482–486 publications: 6 scientists 487–491 publications: 3 scientists 492–496 publications: 5 scientists 497–501 publications: 5 scientists 502–506 publications: 1 scientists 507–511 publications: 6 scientists 512–516 publications: 4 scientists 517–521 publications: 1 scientists 522–526 publications: 3 scientists 527–531 publications: 1 scientists 532–536 publications: 4 scientists 537+ publications: 100 scientists
42 publications 537+

This scientist: 142 publications — 34th percentile

34% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 537 publications or more.

H. J. Keselman D-index placement in Mathematics in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Mathematics scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where H. J. Keselman sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 174 scientists 31 D-Index: 151 scientists 32 D-Index: 174 scientists 33 D-Index: 117 scientists 34 D-Index: 136 scientists 35 D-Index: 127 scientists 36 D-Index: 145 scientists 37 D-Index: 153 scientists 38 D-Index: 150 scientists 39 D-Index: 150 scientists 40 D-Index: 138 scientists 41 D-Index: 136 scientists 42 D-Index: 93 scientists 43 D-Index: 108 scientists 44 D-Index: 115 scientists 45 D-Index: 112 scientists 46 D-Index: 103 scientists 47 D-Index: 75 scientists 48 D-Index: 59 scientists 49 D-Index: 67 scientists 50 D-Index: 60 scientists 51 D-Index: 57 scientists 52 D-Index: 59 scientists 53 D-Index: 62 scientists 54 D-Index: 60 scientists 55 D-Index: 50 scientists 56 D-Index: 42 scientists 57 D-Index: 54 scientists 58 D-Index: 50 scientists 59 D-Index: 42 scientists 60 D-Index: 41 scientists 61 D-Index: 35 scientists 62 D-Index: 40 scientists 63 D-Index: 21 scientists 64 D-Index: 31 scientists 65 D-Index: 27 scientists 66 D-Index: 29 scientists 67 D-Index: 19 scientists 68 D-Index: 25 scientists 69 D-Index: 17 scientists 70 D-Index: 18 scientists 71 D-Index: 12 scientists 72 D-Index: 14 scientists 73 D-Index: 13 scientists 74 D-Index: 18 scientists 75 D-Index: 9 scientists 76 D-Index: 11 scientists 77 D-Index: 10 scientists 78 D-Index: 9 scientists 79 D-Index: 16 scientists 80 D-Index: 12 scientists 81 D-Index: 10 scientists 82 D-Index: 5 scientists 83 D-Index: 5 scientists 84 D-Index: 13 scientists 85 D-Index: 6 scientists 86+ D-Index: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 86+

This scientist: 46 D-Index — 64th percentile

64% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 86 D-Index or more.

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2008 - Fellow of the American Educational Research Association
  • 1985 - Fellow of the American Psychological Association (APA)

Overview

H. J. Keselman is affiliated with the University of Manitoba in Canada. Their academic involvement extends into multiple areas, as indicated by recognition from key professional organizations.

Keselman has been awarded fellowships by prominent bodies in educational and psychological research, specifically the American Educational Research Association in 2008, and the American Psychological Association in 1985. These affiliations suggest active engagement with both educational and psychological sciences.

The profile of Keselman's career is notable for a focus on interdisciplinary fields that bridge education and psychology, although detailed records of publications and specific research topics are not provided. Frequent collaboration and publication venues are not listed, nor are there specified co-authors or book publications attributed to their name in the available data.

There is also no detailed information about Keselman's recent research papers, fields and subfields of study, or main topics of work, which indicates either limited online visibility or a profile centered more on educational impact and professional recognition rather than documented scholarly output in public databases.

As their profile currently stands, Keselman represents an example of a scholar recognized by major academic associations, with a professional base in Canada, contributing primarily through established engagement within educational and psychological research communities rather than through extensive documented publication records.

Best Publications

  • Backward, forward and stepwise automated subset selection algorithms: Frequency of obtaining authentic and noise variables

    Shelley Derksen;H. J. Keselman

  • Statistical Practices of Educational Researchers: An Analysis of their ANOVA, MANOVA, and ANCOVA Analyses:

    H. J. Keselman;Carl J. Huberty;Lisa M. Lix;Stephen Olejnik

  • Consequences of Assumption Violations Revisited: A Quantitative Review of Alternatives to the One-Way Analysis of Variance F Test

    Lisa M. Lix;Joanne C. Keselman;H. J. Keselman

  • Modern robust data analysis methods: measures of central tendency.

    Rand R. Wilcox;H. J. Keselman

  • The analysis of repeated measures designs: a review.

    H. J. Keselman;James Algina;Rhonda K. Kowalchuk

  • Repeated measures F tests and psychophysiological research: controlling the number of false positives.

    H. J. Keselman;Joanne C. Rogan

  • An Alternative to Cohen's Standardized Mean Difference Effect Size: A Robust Parameter and Confidence Interval in the Two Independent Groups Case.

    James Algina;H. J. Keselman;Randall D. Penfield

  • Controlling the rate of Type I error over a large set of statistical tests

    H. J. Keselman;Robert A. Cribbie;Burt Holland

  • Analysis of repeated measurements

    Joanne C. Rogan;H. J. Keselman;Jorge L. Mendoza

  • A comparison of two approaches for selecting covariance structures in the analysis of repeated measurements

    H. J. Keselman;James Algina;Rhonda K. Kowalchuk;Russell D. Wolfinger

  • A Generally Robust Approach for Testing Hypotheses and Setting Confidence Intervals for Effect Sizes

    H. J. Keselman;James Algina;Lisa M. Lix;Rand R. Wilcox

  • The Analysis of Repeated Measurements with Mixed-Model Adjusted F Tests

    Rhonda K. Kowalchuk;H. J. Keselman;James Algina;Russell D. Wolfinger

  • The New and Improved Two-Sample t Test

    H.J. Keselman;Abdul R. Othman;Rand R. Wilcox;Katherine Fradette

  • To Trim or Not To Trim: Tests of Location Equality under Heteroscedasticity and Nonnormality.

    Lisa M. Lix;H. J. Keselman

  • The pairwise multiple comparison multiplicity problem: An alternative approach to familywise and comparison wise Type I error control.

    H. J. Keselman;Robert Cribbie;Burt Holland

  • Is the ANOVA F-Test Robust to Variance Heterogeneity When Sample Sizes are Equal?: An Investigation via a Coefficient of Variation:

    Joanne C. Rogan;H. J. Keselman

  • The Tukey multiple comparison test: 1953–1976.

    H. J. Keselman;Joanne C. Rogan

  • Testing the validity conditions of repeated measures F tests.

    H. J. Keselman;Joanne C. Rogan;Jorge L. Mendoza;Lawrence J. Breen

  • A generally robust approach to hypothesis testing in independent and correlated groups designs.

    H. J. Keselman;Rand R. Wilcox;Lisa M. Lix

  • The analysis of repeated measurements: a comparison of mixed-model satterthwaite f tests and a nonpooled adjusted degrees of freedom multivariate test

    H.J. Keselman;James Algina;Rhonda K. Kowalchuk;Russell D. Wolfinger

  • Multiple Comparison Procedures

    H. J. Keselman;Burt Holland;Robert A. Cribbie

Frequent Co-Authors

Rand R. Wilcox
Rand R. Wilcox University of Southern California
James Algina
James Algina University of Florida
Lisa M. Lix
Lisa M. Lix University of Manitoba
Bruno D. Zumbo
Bruno D. Zumbo University of British Columbia
Joel R. Levin
Joel R. Levin University of Arizona

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

For students pursuing Mathematics in the USA, exploring related online degrees can open diverse career opportunities. Many professionals opt for business-focused programs like an shortest online MBA to complement their quantitative skills. These accelerated programs allow students to earn valuable credentials in less time, making career transitions smoother.

Marketing is another popular field where mathematical analysis and data interpretation are vital. Obtaining an online marketing degree can provide insights into market trends and consumer behavior, leveraging quantitative modeling for strategic advantage.

Many graduate programs now offer concentrated options such as a 1 year MBA, helping students quickly integrate business expertise with their mathematical foundation. This approach is ideal for those seeking to enhance leadership roles in finance, analytics, or consulting.

Prospective students often ask, can you transfer MBA credits? The answer is yes—transfer credit policies can reduce the overall time and cost of earning an MBA, especially in online formats. Programs featured at can you transfer MBA credits detail how this flexibility benefits working professionals balancing education with career demands.

Best Scientists Citing H. J. Keselman

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles