World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
34
Citations
7437
World Ranking
11957
National Ranking
185

Ido Roll publication distribution in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Computer Science in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Ido Roll sits on this spectrum.

32–41 publications: 7 scientists 42–51 publications: 22 scientists 52–61 publications: 82 scientists 62–71 publications: 134 scientists 72–81 publications: 249 scientists 82–91 publications: 324 scientists 92–101 publications: 421 scientists 102–111 publications: 420 scientists 112–121 publications: 497 scientists 122–131 publications: 544 scientists 132–141 publications: 555 scientists 142–151 publications: 609 scientists 152–161 publications: 559 scientists 162–171 publications: 534 scientists 172–181 publications: 556 scientists 182–191 publications: 583 scientists 192–201 publications: 519 scientists 202–211 publications: 508 scientists 212–221 publications: 490 scientists 222–231 publications: 437 scientists 232–241 publications: 423 scientists 242–251 publications: 408 scientists 252–261 publications: 377 scientists 262–271 publications: 301 scientists 272–281 publications: 335 scientists 282–291 publications: 320 scientists 292–301 publications: 293 scientists 302–311 publications: 250 scientists 312–321 publications: 238 scientists 322–331 publications: 206 scientists 332–341 publications: 209 scientists 342–351 publications: 208 scientists 352–361 publications: 162 scientists 362–371 publications: 176 scientists 372–381 publications: 127 scientists 382–391 publications: 158 scientists 392–401 publications: 128 scientists 402–411 publications: 104 scientists 412–421 publications: 94 scientists 422–431 publications: 99 scientists 432–441 publications: 83 scientists 442–451 publications: 108 scientists 452–461 publications: 73 scientists 462–471 publications: 77 scientists 472–481 publications: 69 scientists 482–491 publications: 84 scientists 492–501 publications: 62 scientists 502–511 publications: 54 scientists 512–521 publications: 57 scientists 522–531 publications: 51 scientists 532–541 publications: 51 scientists 542–551 publications: 32 scientists 552–561 publications: 38 scientists 562–571 publications: 28 scientists 572–581 publications: 43 scientists 582–591 publications: 33 scientists 592–601 publications: 41 scientists 602–611 publications: 32 scientists 612–621 publications: 28 scientists 622–631 publications: 25 scientists 632–641 publications: 27 scientists 642–651 publications: 17 scientists 652–661 publications: 20 scientists 662–671 publications: 17 scientists 672–681 publications: 15 scientists 682–691 publications: 14 scientists 692–701 publications: 21 scientists 702–711 publications: 13 scientists 712–721 publications: 12 scientists 722–731 publications: 19 scientists 732–741 publications: 14 scientists 742–751 publications: 12 scientists 752–761 publications: 10 scientists 762–771 publications: 10 scientists 772–781 publications: 11 scientists 782–791 publications: 10 scientists 792–801 publications: 11 scientists 802–811 publications: 8 scientists 812–821 publications: 8 scientists 822–831 publications: 7 scientists 832–841 publications: 11 scientists 842–851 publications: 10 scientists 852–861 publications: 5 scientists 862–871 publications: 9 scientists 872–881 publications: 4 scientists 882–891 publications: 6 scientists 892–901 publications: 3 scientists 902–911 publications: 6 scientists 912–921 publications: 3 scientists 922–931 publications: 2 scientists 932–941 publications: 2 scientists 942–951 publications: 2 scientists 952–961 publications: 3 scientists 962–971 publications: 3 scientists 972–981 publications: 3 scientists 982–990 publications: 5 scientists 991+ publications: 100 scientists
32 publications 991+

This scientist: 88 publications — 5th percentile

5% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more.

Ido Roll D-index placement in Computer Science in 2026

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

30–31 D-Index: 879 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 983 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 918 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 990 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 968 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 907 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 821 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 763 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 689 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 543 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 543 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 518 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 500 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 458 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 400 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 337 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 308 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 292 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 249 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 213 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 192 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 189 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 165 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 139 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 119 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 121 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 113 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 88 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 87 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 75 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 69 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 57 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 46 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 38 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 34 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 36 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 27 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 37 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 18 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 31 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 19 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 16 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 20 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 15 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 5 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 20 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 8 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 5 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 7 scientists 130 D-Index: 3 scientists 131+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 34 D-Index — 16th percentile

16% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more.

Overview

Ido Roll is affiliated with the Technion - Israel Institute of Technology in Israel. Their research spans multiple fields with a focus on psychology, social sciences, and computer science. Subfields of particular interest include developmental and educational psychology, education, computer science applications, artificial intelligence, and experimental and cognitive psychology.

Their work addresses several main topics, including:

  • Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Online Learning and Analytics
  • Online and Blended Learning
  • Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Educational Games and Gamification
  • Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
  • Innovative Teaching Methods

Frequent co-authors of Ido Roll include Janan Saba, Kyoungwon Seo, Manu Kapur, Jade Maï Cock, and Tanja Käser. These collaborations have led to publications in notable venues such as the International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, Instructional Science, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, Computers & Education, and Computers in Human Behavior.

Selected recent papers highlight the scope of their research:

  • "The impact of artificial intelligence on learner-instructor interaction in online learning," 2021, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
  • "Supporting students' self-regulated learning in online learning using artificial intelligence applications," 2023, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
  • "Active learning with online video: The impact of learning context on engagement," 2021, Computers & Education
  • "Rethinking (Dis)engagement in human-computer interaction," 2021, Computers in Human Behavior
  • "Interface and interaction design for an online, asynchronous peer instruction tool," 2021, Interactive Learning Environments

Ido Roll has also contributed to academic literature through book publications with Springer Science+Business Media. Two editions of "Artificial Intelligence in Education" published in 2021 are notable additions to their portfolio.

Best Publications

  • Evolution and Revolution in Artificial Intelligence in Education

    Ido Roll;Ruth Wylie

  • The impact of artificial intelligence on learner-instructor interaction in online learning.

    Kyoungwon Seo;Joice Tang;Ido Roll;Sidney Fels

  • Toward Meta-cognitive Tutoring: A Model of Help Seeking with a Cognitive Tutor

    Vincent Aleven;Bruce Mclaren;Ido Roll;Kenneth Koedinger

  • Improving students’ help-seeking skills using metacognitive feedback in an intelligent tutoring system

    Ido Roll;Vincent Aleven;Bruce M. McLaren;Kenneth R. Koedinger

  • Why Students Engage in “Gaming the System” Behavior in Interactive Learning Environments

    Ryan Baker;Jason Walonoski;Neil Heffernan;Ido Roll

  • Adapting to when students game an intelligent tutoring system

    Ryan S. J. d. Baker;Albert T. Corbett;Kenneth R. Koedinger;Shelley Evenson

  • Towards a theory of when and how problem solving followed by instruction supports learning.

    Katharina Loibl;Ido Roll;Nikol Rummel

  • Developing a generalizable detector of when students game the system

    Ryan S. Baker;Albert T. Corbett;Ido Roll;Kenneth R. Koedinger

  • Understanding, Evaluating, and Supporting Self-Regulated Learning Using Learning Analytics.

    Ido Roll;Philip H. Winne

  • Toward Tutoring Help Seeking

    Vincent Aleven;Bruce McLaren;Ido Roll;Kenneth Koedinger

  • Help Helps, But Only So Much: Research on Help Seeking with Intelligent Tutoring Systems

    Vincent Aleven;Ido Roll;Bruce M. McLaren;Kenneth R. Koedinger

  • Toward Tutoring Help Seeking Applying Cognitive Modeling to Meta-cognitive Skills

    Vincent Aleven;Bruce M. McLaren;Ido Roll;Kenneth R. Koedinger

  • Designing for metacognition—applying cognitive tutor principles to the tutoring of help seeking

    Ido Roll;Vincent Aleven;Bruce M. McLaren;Kenneth R. Koedinger

  • Evaluating metacognitive scaffolding in Guided Invention Activities

    Ido Roll;Natasha G. Holmes;James Day;Doug Bonn

  • Automated, Unobtrusive, Action-by-Action Assessment of Self-Regulation during Learning with an Intelligent Tutoring System.

    Vincent Aleven;Ido Roll;Bruce M. McLaren;Kenneth R. Koedinger

  • Active learning with online video: The impact of learning context on engagement

    Kyoungwon Seo;Samuel Dodson;Negar M. Harandi;Nathan Roberson

  • Making the failure more productive: scaffolding the invention process to improve inquiry behaviors and outcomes in invention activities

    Natasha Holmes;James Day;Anthony Park;Doug Bonn

  • On the Benefits of Seeking (and Avoiding) Help in Online Problem-Solving Environments.

    Ido Roll;Ryan S. J. d. Baker;Vincent Aleven;Kenneth R. Koedinger

  • Rethinking (Dis)engagement in human-computer interaction

    Heather L. O'Brien;Heather L. O'Brien;Ido Roll;Ido Roll;Andrea Kampen;Andrea Kampen;Nilou Davoudi;Nilou Davoudi

  • In Vivo Experiments on Whether Supporting Metacognition in Intelligent Tutoring Systems Yields Robust Learning

    Ken Koedinger;Vincent Aleven;Ido Roll;Ryan Baker

  • Modeling students' metacognitive errors in two intelligent tutoring systems

    Ido Roll;Ryan S. Baker;Vincent Aleven;Bruce M. McLaren

Frequent Co-Authors

Kenneth R. Koedinger
Kenneth R. Koedinger Carnegie Mellon University
Vincent Aleven
Vincent Aleven Carnegie Mellon University
Ryan S. Baker
Ryan S. Baker University of Pennsylvania
Bruce M. McLaren
Bruce M. McLaren Carnegie Mellon University
Sidney Fels
Sidney Fels University of British Columbia
Albert T. Corbett
Albert T. Corbett Carnegie Mellon University
Cristina Conati
Cristina Conati University of British Columbia
Roger Azevedo
Roger Azevedo University of Central Florida
Antonija Mitrovic
Antonija Mitrovic University of Canterbury
Gautam Biswas
Gautam Biswas Vanderbilt 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

Exploring online education in Computer Science opens up a range of flexible and accessible opportunities. If you are looking to complete your studies affordably, consider programs offering cheap online degrees fast. These programs are designed to help you earn a reputable qualification while minimizing costs and time commitments.

Worried about your academic history? Many online colleges that accept 2.0 gpa offer inclusive admission policies, allowing more students to pursue their passion for technology.

If you are interested in technology but also passionate about sustainability, consider how your skill set can translate. For example, explore what can you do with an environmental science degree. There are growing intersections between environmental science, data analysis, and computing careers.

For those aiming to jumpstart their careers quickly, you might benefit from a 2-year computer science degree online. These accelerated pathways are ideal for career changers or recent graduates seeking fast entry into tech fields.

Best Scientists Citing Ido Roll

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles