World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
56
Citations
28122
World Ranking
4099
National Ranking
2292

Janis A. Cannon-Bowers 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 Janis A. Cannon-Bowers 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: 344 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: 34 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 701–705 publications: 5 scientists 706+ publications: 100 scientists
31 publications 706+

This scientist: 121 publications — 33rd percentile

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

The last bar groups every scientist with 706 publications or more.

Janis A. Cannon-Bowers 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 Janis A. Cannon-Bowers 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: 559 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: 87 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: 79 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: 56 D-Index — 64th percentile

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

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

Overview

Janis A. Cannon-Bowers is affiliated with the University of Central Florida in the United States. Their research spans several areas within psychology, with particular focus on applied psychology, social psychology, and clinical psychology.

Their scholarly contributions include work on coaching methods, psychological therapy, and developmental practices in education. The key topics explored in their research are:

  • Coaching Methods and Impact
  • Psychology, Coaching, and Therapy
  • Ego Development and Educational Practices

Janis A. Cannon-Bowers has contributed to academic literature with a notable recent paper titled "Workplace coaching: a meta-analysis and recommendations for advancing the science of coaching", published in 2023 in the journal Frontiers in Psychology. This publication has received attention within the research community, as evidenced by citation metrics.

Their frequent collaborators include the following researchers:

  • Clint Bowers
  • Catherine E. Carlson
  • Shannon Doherty
  • Jocelyne Evans
  • Julie Hall

Their work is primarily published in the journal Frontiers in Psychology, reflecting their engagement within psychological research arenas.

Best Publications

  • The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance.

    John E. Mathieu;Tonia S. Heffner;Gerald F. Goodwin;Eduardo Salas

  • Shared mental models in expert team decision making.

    Janis A. Cannon-Bowers;Eduardo Salas;Sharolyn Converse

  • The Science of Training: A Decade of Progress

    Eduardo Salas;Janis A. Cannon-Bowers

  • Reflections on shared cognition

    Janis A. Cannon-Bowers;Eduardo Salas

  • Defining Competencies and Establishing Team Training Requirements

    Janis A. Cannon-Bowers;Scott I. Tannenbaum;Eduardo Salas;Catherine E. Volpe

  • Computer Gaming and Interactive Simulations for Learning: A Meta-Analysis.

    Jennifer J. Vogel;David S. Vogel;Jan Cannon-Bowers;Clint A. Bowers

  • Meeting trainees' expectations: The influence of training fulfillment on the development of commitment, self-efficacy, and motivation.

    Scott I. Tannenbaum;John E. Mathieu;Eduardo Salas;Janis A. Cannon-Bowers

  • Measuring Team Knowledge

    Nancy J. Cooke;Eduardo Salas;Janis A. Cannon-Bowers;Renée J. Stout

  • Planning, Shared Mental Models, and Coordinated Performance: An Empirical Link Is Established:

    Renée J. Stout;Janis A. Cannon-Bowers;Eduardo Salas;Dana M. Milanovich

  • Making decisions under stress: Implications for individual and team training.

    Janis A. Cannon-Bowers;Eduardo Salas

  • The role of mental models in team performance in complex systems

    W.B. Rouse;J.A. Cannon-Bowers;E. Salas

  • Scaling the quality of teammates' mental models: equifinality and normative comparisons

    John E. Mathieu;Tonia S. Heffner;Gerald F. Goodwin;Janis A. Cannon-Bowers

  • Team leadership and development: Theory, principles, and guidelines for training leaders and teams.

    Steve W. J. Kozlowski;Stanley M. Gully;Eduardo Salas;Janis A. Cannon-Bowers

  • Teamwork: emerging principles

    Eduardo Salas;C. Shawn Burke;Janis A. Cannon-Bowers

  • Guided Team Self-Correction: Impacts on Team Mental Models, Processes, and Effectiveness

    Kimberly A. Smith-Jentsch;Janis A. Cannon-Bowers;Scott I. Tannenbaum;Eduardo Salas

  • Toward Theoretically Based Principles of Training Effectiveness: A Model and Initial Empirical Investigation

    Janis A. Cannon-Bowers;Eduardo Salas;Scott I. Tannenbaum;John E. Mathieu

  • Teamwork in multi-person systems: a review and analysis.

    Carol R. Paris;Eduardo Salas;Janis A. Cannon-Bowers

  • The Impact of Cross-Training on Team Functioning: An Empirical Investigation

    Catherine E. Volpe;Janis A. Cannon-Bowers;Eduardo Salas;Paul E. Spector

  • Measuring Team Knowledge: A Window to the Cognitive Underpinnings of Team Performance

    Nancy J. Cooke;Preston A. Kiekel;Eduardo Salas;Renée Stout

  • A multilevel approach to training effectiveness: Enhancing horizontal and vertical transfer.

    Steve W. J. Kozlowski;Kenneth G. Brown;Daniel A. Weissbein;Janis A. Cannon-Bowers

  • The Impact of Cross-Training and Workload on Team Functioning: A Replication and Extension of Initial Findings

    Janis A. Cannon-Bowers;Eduardo Salas;Elizabeth Blickensderfer;Clint A. Bowers

  • Do Computer-Based Games Facilitate Knowledge Acquisition and Retention?

    Katrina E. Ricci;Eduardo Salas;Janis A. Cannon-Bowers

Frequent Co-Authors

Eduardo Salas
Eduardo Salas Rice University
Scott I. Tannenbaum
Scott I. Tannenbaum University at Albany, State University of New York
John E. Mathieu
John E. Mathieu University of Connecticut
Stephen M. Fiore
Stephen M. Fiore University of Central Florida
Steve W. J. Kozlowski
Steve W. J. Kozlowski University of South Florida
Paul E. Spector
Paul E. Spector University of South Florida
Arthur D. Fisk
Arthur D. Fisk Georgia Institute of Technology

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

Pursuing a psychology degree in the USA opens the door to various career pathways, especially in mental health counseling. Online psychology programs offer flexibility and accessibility, allowing students to gain specialized education while balancing other commitments.

It’s essential to understand that requirements for becoming a mental health counselor can vary significantly by location. For example, Anaheim mental health counselor certification requirements differ in key ways from those in other cities. If you’re interested in the northern states, you should explore what it takes to become a mental health counselor in Anchorage.

Various regions have unique licensure standards. For instance, if you want to become a mental health counselor in Arlington or meet the Atlanta mental health counselor certification requirements, check local regulations before enrolling.

Exploring these pathways ensures you’re prepared for your desired career in mental health, with the right education and credentials for your chosen location.

Best Scientists Citing Janis A. Cannon-Bowers

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles