World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
41
Citations
5629
World Ranking
7993
National Ranking
790

J. Richard Eiser 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 J. Richard Eiser 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: 210 publications — 72nd percentile

72% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

J. Richard Eiser 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 J. Richard Eiser 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: 41 D-Index — 33rd percentile

33% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

J. Richard Eiser is affiliated with the University of Sheffield in the United Kingdom. Their academic profile reflects collaborations with other researchers, including Philip J. Rudling and Denis Mareschal. These partnerships indicate involvement in multidisciplinary or co-authored research projects.

Although specific publication venues are not listed for this scientist, their active engagement with frequent co-authors suggests participation in ongoing scholarly communication and research networks. This involvement is a typical feature in academia for advancing collective knowledge.

The data available does not provide explicit information on the main fields, subfields, or specific topics of study. However, the presence of frequent co-authors and the affiliation with a well-known university imply a research background grounded in higher education and scientific inquiry.

Details concerning individual papers, with titles, publication years, and venues, or book publications are not provided, limiting a detailed overview of their scholarly output. Likewise, there are no records of awards or distinctions currently available.

This scientist is currently living, and their career appears to be ongoing based on the lack of retirement or deceased status. Their collaboration patterns and academic placement suggest contributions to their field through joint research efforts and institutional association.

Best Publications

  • Risk interpretation and action: A conceptual framework for responses to natural hazards

    J. Richard Eiser;Ann Bostrom;Ian Burton;David M. Johnston

  • Risk Perceptions of Mobile Phone Use While Driving

    Matthew P. White;J. Richard Eiser;Peter R. Harris

  • Differences in relapse precipitants and coping behaviour between alcohol relapsers and survivors.

    Gloria K. Litman;J.Richard Eiser;Nigel S.B. Rawson;A.N. Oppenheim

  • Sexual Relationships on Holiday: A Case of Situational Disinhibition?:

    J. Richard Eiser;Nicholas Ford

  • Adolescent health behaviour and similarity-attraction: friends share smoking habits (really), but much else besides.

    J. Richard Eiser;Michelle Morgan;Philip Gammage;Neil Brooks

  • Young children's understanding of smoking

    Christine Eiser;Christine Eiser;Susan Walsh;Susan Walsh;J.Richard Eiser;J.Richard Eiser

  • Accentuation theory, polarization and the judgment of attitude statements

    J. Richard Eiser;Joop van der Pligt

  • Marginal Trust in Risk Managers: Building and Losing Trust Following Decisions Under Uncertainty

    Mathew P. White;J. Richard Eiser

  • Towards a typology of relapse: A preliminary report

    Gloria K. Litman;J.Richard Eiser;Nigel S.B. Rawson;A.N. Oppenheim

  • COMPARATIVE JUDGMENTS AND PREFERENCES : THE INFLUENCE OF THE NUMBER OF RESPONSE ALTERNATIVES

    Joop van der Pligt;J. Richard Eiser;Russell Spears

  • Connectionist Simulation of Attitude Learning: Asymmetries in the Acquisition of Positive and Negative Evaluations

    J. Richard Eiser;Russell H. Fazio;Tom Stafford;Tony J. Prescott

  • Parenting the premature infant: balancing vulnerability and quality of life.

    C. Eiser;J. R. Eiser;A.G. Mayhew;A.T. Gibson

  • Adolescent smoking: attitudes, norms and parental influence.

    J. Richard Eiser;Michelle Morgan;Philip Gammage;Elspeth Gray

  • Predictors of psychological well-being in types 1 and 2 diabetes

    J. Richard Eiser;Afsane Riazi;Christine Eiser;Suzie Hammersley

  • Attitude generalization: Similarity, valence, and extremity

    Natalie J. Shook;Russell H. Fazio;J. Richard Eiser

  • Attitudes toward Nuclear Energy: Familiarity and Salience

    J Van Der Pligt;E. Eiser;Russell Spears

  • Adjustment to Chronic Disease in Relation to Age and Gender: Mothers' and Fathers' Reports of Their Childrens' Behavior

    C Eiser;T Havermans;M Pancer;J R Eiser

  • NUCLEAR ATTITUDES BEFORE AND AFTER CHERNOBYL : CHANGE AND JUDGMENT

    E. Eiser;Russell Spears;P Webley

  • Illusory correlation in the perception of group attitudes

    Russell Spears;J Van Der Pligt;E. Eiser

  • Dimensional salience: judgment and attitudes

    Joop van der Pligt;J. Richard Eiser

Frequent Co-Authors

Christine Eiser
Christine Eiser University of Sheffield
Joop van der Pligt
Joop van der Pligt University of Amsterdam
Russell Spears
Russell Spears University of Groningen
Paul A. Webley
Paul A. Webley University of Melbourne
Mathew P. White
Mathew P. White University of Vienna
Neil S. Coulson
Neil S. Coulson University of Nottingham
Peter R. Harris
Peter R. Harris University of Sussex
Leon Mann
Leon Mann University of Melbourne
Sabine Pahl
Sabine Pahl University of Vienna
Fabio Sani
Fabio Sani University of Dundee

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

Students interested in psychology have a variety of flexible online degree options to match unique career goals and timelines. For those aiming to advance quickly, fastest online masters in aba programs offer a streamlined path to enter the field of applied behavior analysis, with some programs designed to be completed in as little as 18 months.

Aspiring leaders can consider accelerated online doctoral programs in behavioral health leadership, which focus on advanced administrative and clinical skills for those who want to shape mental health services at a higher level.

Specialized pathways like forensic psychology jobs offer unique opportunities to work with law enforcement or legal systems, applying psychological principles to criminal investigation, profiling, and the court process.

Prospective students often ask, how long is a psychology degree? The answer varies by program and career pathway. Bachelor’s degrees can take four years, while master’s and doctoral programs may require two to four additional years—though accelerated options can shorten this timeline significantly.

Best Scientists Citing J. Richard Eiser

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles