World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
43
Citations
5615
World Ranking
7355
National Ranking
733

Jane Simpson publications per year

1999: 1 publications 2000: 1 publications 2001: 0 publications 2002: 1 publications 2003: 0 publications 2004: 1 publications 2005: 2 publications 2006: 4 publications 2007: 8 publications 2008: 6 publications 2009: 4 publications 2010: 12 publications 2011: 4 publications 2012: 6 publications 2013: 11 publications 2014: 11 publications 2015: 10 publications 2016: 17 publications 2017: 9 publications 2018: 16 publications 2019: 10 publications 2020: 12 publications 2021: 16 publications 2022: 11 publications 2023: 13 publications 2024: 13 publications 2025: 6 publications
1999 2025

205 publications in total across all disciplines

Jane Simpson 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 Jane Simpson 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: 165 publications — 56th percentile

56% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Jane Simpson 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 Jane Simpson 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: 43 D-Index — 38th percentile

38% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Jane Simpson is affiliated with Lancaster University in the United Kingdom. Their research is primarily situated within the field of Medicine, focusing on several key subfields and topics related to neurological and psychological health.

The main subfields of their work include:

  • Neurology
  • General Health Professions
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental Health
  • Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

Simpson's research covers a range of topics, including:

  • Genetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
  • Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Parkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes

Among their recent published papers are:

  • "Experiences of stigma in people with epilepsy: A meta-synthesis of qualitative evidence" (2021) in Seizure
  • "Psychological interventions for people with Parkinson's disease in the early 2020s: Where do we stand?" (2020) in Psychology and Psychotherapy Theory Research and Practice
  • "Psychological Interventions for People with Huntington's Disease: A Call to Arms" (2020) in Journal of Huntington's Disease
  • "Stigma, self-compassion, and psychological distress among people with Parkinson's" (2022) in Disability and Rehabilitation
  • "Giving and receiving a diagnosis of a progressive neurological condition: A scoping review of doctors' and patients' perspectives" (2020) in Patient Education and Counseling

Frequent coauthors who have contributed to their research include:

  • Fiona Eccles
  • Nicolò Zarotti
  • Maria Dale
  • Craig Murray
  • Sarah Gunn

Simpson often publishes in journals such as:

  • Disability and Rehabilitation
  • Journal of Huntington's Disease
  • Seizure
  • Journal of Personalized Medicine
  • Chronic Illness

Best Publications

  • Is disgust a homogeneous emotion

    Jane Simpson;Sarah Carter;Susan H. Anthony;Paul G. Overton

  • Self-disgust mediates the relationship between dysfunctional cognitions and depressive symptomatology

    P. G. Overton;F. E. Markland;H. S. Taggart;G. L. Bagshaw

  • Insecure attachment predicts proneness to paranoia but not hallucinations

    Laura Pickering;Jane Simpson;Richard P. Bentall

  • Couples' shared experiences of dementia: a meta-synthesis of the impact upon relationships and couplehood

    Olivia Wadham;Jane Simpson;Jonathan Rust;Craig Murray

  • A qualitative analysis of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) in Parkinson's disease

    Lee. Fitzpatrick;Jane. Simpson;Alistair. Smith

  • Reconsidering the term ‘carer’: a critique of the universal adoption of the term ‘carer’

    Victoria Molyneaux;Sarah Butchard;Jane Simpson;Craig Murray

  • Depressive realism and outcome density bias in contingency judgments: the effect of the context and intertrial interval.

    Rachel M. Msetfi;Robin A. Murphy;Jane Simpson;Diana E. Kornbrot

  • The co-construction of couplehood in dementia

    Victoria J. Molyneaux;Sarah Butchard;Jane Simpson;Craig Murray

  • Do improvements in emotional distress correlate with becoming more mindful? A study of older adults.

    Kate Splevins;Alistair Smith;Jane Simpson

  • A narrative exploration of older people's transitions into residential care.

    Victoria S. P. Lee;Jane Simpson;Katherine Froggatt

  • Does hope predict adjustment to end‐stage renal failure and consequent dialysis?

    Elizabeth Billington;Jane Simpson;Jen Unwin;Dominic Bray

  • A systematic review of pre-operative predictors of post-operative depression and anxiety in individuals who have undergone coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

    Louise H McKenzie;Jane Simpson;Marie Stewart

  • The experience of caring for a partner with young onset dementia: How younger carers cope

    Shirley Lockeridge;Jane Simpson

  • Social support and psychological outcome in people with Parkinson's disease: Evidence for a specific pattern of associations.

    Jane Simpson;Katrina Haines;Godwin Lekwuwa;John Wardle

  • Health Care Workers’ Experiences of Mindfulness Training: a Qualitative Review

    Peter Morgan;Jane Simpson;Alistair Smith

  • The experience of caring for patients with dementia within a general hospital setting: a meta-synthesis of the qualitative literature

    Alex Turner;Fiona J R Eccles;Ruth Elvish;Jane Simpson

  • The revolting self:an interpretative phenomenological analysis of the experience of self-disgust in females with depressive symptoms

    Philip A. Powell;Paul G. Overton;Jane Simpson

  • Perceived discrimination and psychosis: a systematic review of the literature.

    Josie Pearce;Sonya Rafiq;Jane Simpson;Filippo Varese

  • The relationship between pre-morbid personality and challenging behaviour in people with dementia: A systematic review.

    Hannah Osborne;Jane Simpson;Graham Stokes

  • When disgust leads to dysphoria: a three-wave longitudinal study assessing the temporal relationship between self-disgust and depressive symptoms.

    Philip A. Powell;Jane Simpson;Paul G. Overton

  • Change counselling in diabetes: the development of a training programme for the diabetes team.

    Y. Doherty;D. Hall;P.T. James;S.H. Roberts

  • Depressive realism and the effect of intertrial interval on judgements of zero, positive, and negative contingencies

    Rachel M. Msetfi;Robin A. Murphy;Jane Simpson

  • A mixed methods systematic review of multimodal non-pharmacological interventions to improve cognition for people with dementia:

    Garuth Chalfont;Christine Milligan;Jane Simpson

Frequent Co-Authors

Paul G. Overton
Paul G. Overton University of Sheffield
Craig Murray
Craig Murray Lancaster University
Filippo Varese
Filippo Varese University of Manchester
Trevor J. Crawford
Trevor J. Crawford Lancaster University
Christine Milligan
Christine Milligan Lancaster University
David Craufurd
David Craufurd University of Manchester
Linden J. Ball
Linden J. Ball University of Central Lancashire
John Keady
John Keady University of Manchester
Carol Thomas
Carol Thomas Lancaster University
Michael T. Smith
Michael T. Smith Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

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

If you're interested in studying Psychology in the USA, there are numerous related online degrees and career pathways to consider. Many psychology graduates explore careers in social work, counseling, or mental health support, fields that often require specific educational backgrounds and licensure depending on the state of practice.

For instance, those aiming to become social workers will find that requirements differ across states. To understand what's needed in South Carolina, see the social worker education requirements in South Carolina. If you’re looking at opportunities in South Dakota, be sure to check the social worker education requirements in South Dakota for specific guidance.

Similarly, those considering Tennessee should review the Tennessee education requirements for social workers. In Texas, standards and training may differ as outlined in the Texas minimum degree requirement for social workers.

Exploring these pathways and understanding regional requirements can help you choose the right degree and pave the way to a rewarding psychology-related career.

Best Scientists Citing Jane Simpson

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles