World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Janis A. Cannon-Bowers

Janis A. Cannon-Bowers

Last Updated:

D-Index & Metrics

?
Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Psychology 56 4097 3780 2292 2066 121 28122

Janis A. Cannon-Bowers publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Janis A. Cannon-Bowers between 1988 and 2023, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Janis A. Cannon-Bowers published across 36 years, from 1988 to 2023, averaging 3.7 papers a year. Output peaked at 18 publications in 2000. 1 of the 133 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1988 to 2023. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 18. Peak 18 publications in 2000. 1988: 1 publication 1989: 1 publication 1990: 2 publications 1991: 4 publications 1992: 3 publications 1993: 3 publications 1994: 1 publication 1995: 8 publications 1996: 6 publications 1997: 9 publications 1998: 14 publications 1999: 5 publications 2000: 18 publications 2001: 5 publications 2002: 1 publication 2003: 1 publication 2004: 2 publications 2005: 2 publications 2006: 5 publications 2007: 3 publications 2008: 3 publications 2009: 6 publications 2010: 7 publications 2011: 2 publications 2012: 1 publication 2013: 6 publications 2014: 4 publications 2015: 2 publications 2016: 1 publication 2017: 4 publications 2018: 2 publications 2019: 0 publications 2020: 0 publications 2021: 0 publications 2022: 0 publications 2023: 1 publication
1988 2023

133 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Janis A. Cannon-Bowers: publications per year, 1988 to 2023
Year Publications
1988 1
1989 1
1990 2
1991 4
1992 3
1993 3
1994 1
1995 8
1996 6
1997 9
1998 14
1999 5
2000 18
2001 5
2002 1
2003 1
2004 2
2005 2
2006 5
2007 3
2008 3
2009 6
2010 7
2011 2
2012 1
2013 6
2014 4
2015 2
2016 1
2017 4
2018 2
2019 0
2020 0
2021 0
2022 0
2023 1
Total 133
Download as CSV

Janis A. Cannon-Bowers publications per year - data summary

  • Janis A. Cannon-Bowers, a Psychology scholar from University of Central Florida, has 133 publications recorded across 36 years, from 1988 to 2023.
  • The oldest publication on record dates to 1988 and the most recent to 2023.
  • The most productive year is 2000, with 18 publications.
  • The least productive years with any output are 1988, 1989, 1994, 2002 and others, with 1 publication each.
  • 4 of the 36 years in the span carry no publications at all (2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022).
  • The rate of publication averages 3.7 papers per year over the whole span, or 4.2 per year counting only the 32 years with at least one publication.
  • The last 5 years on the chart (2019-2023) hold 1 publication, <1% of the career total.
  • Split into equal eras - 1988-1999: 57 publications (4.8 per year); 2000-2011: 55 publications (4.6 per year); 2012-2023: 21 publications (1.8 per year).
  • Comparing the opening and closing eras, the overall trend of publication is declining.

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.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 69 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 31–40 to 705+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 736. Most scientists, 736, have 101–110 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 121–130 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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
31–40 publications 705+

This scientist: 121 publications — 33rd percentile

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

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
31–40 6
41–50 52
51–60 138
61–70 299
71–80 461
81–90 605
91–100 713
101–110 736
111–120 686
121–130 670 121
131–140 644
141–150 597
151–160 576
161–170 477
171–180 450
181–190 397
191–200 343
201–210 328
211–220 313
221–230 283
231–240 226
241–250 196
251–260 201
261–270 171
271–280 151
281–290 139
291–300 113
301–310 102
311–320 100
321–330 76
331–340 92
341–350 85
351–360 69
361–370 71
371–380 63
381–390 58
391–400 57
401–410 43
411–420 33
421–430 50
431–440 41
441–450 32
451–460 27
461–470 28
471–480 25
481–490 28
491–500 20
501–510 23
511–520 26
521–530 17
531–540 21
541–550 14
551–560 16
561–570 10
571–580 22
581–590 9
591–600 14
601–610 9
611–620 11
621–630 4
631–640 7
641–650 5
651–660 10
661–670 8
671–680 8
681–690 4
691–700 3
701–704 4
705+ 100
Download as CSV

Janis A. Cannon-Bowers publication distribution in Psychology in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the publication count of all 11,416 Psychology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 69 ranges running from 31–40 to 705+ publications.
  • Janis A. Cannon-Bowers, a Psychology scholar from University of Central Florida, records 121 publications - the 33rd percentile of the discipline.
  • 33% of ranked Psychology scientists score the same or lower than Janis A. Cannon-Bowers, and about 67% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 151–160 publications range, and Janis A. Cannon-Bowers ranks below the median.
  • The most crowded range is 101–110 publications, holding 736 scientists (6% of the field).
  • 72% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 201–210 publications), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 705 publications or more, 100 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

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.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 58 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 144+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 702. Most scientists, 702, have 32–33 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 56–57 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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
30–31 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.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 398
32–33 702
34–35 671
36–37 659
38–39 641
40–41 671
42–43 617
44–45 558
46–47 495
48–49 487
50–51 445
52–53 390
54–55 408
56–57 345 56
58–59 325
60–61 321
62–63 248
64–65 290
66–67 218
68–69 219
70–71 215
72–73 183
74–75 169
76–77 132
78–79 137
80–81 120
82–83 112
84–85 86
86–87 101
88–89 83
90–91 77
92–93 70
94–95 78
96–97 58
98–99 53
100–101 57
102–103 48
104–105 53
106–107 46
108–109 24
110–111 35
112–113 27
114–115 32
116–117 31
118–119 22
120–121 16
122–123 24
124–125 18
126–127 11
128–129 19
130–131 10
132–133 16
134–135 10
136–137 12
138–139 8
140–141 5
142–143 12
144+ 98
Download as CSV

Janis A. Cannon-Bowers D-index placement in Psychology in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the discipline H-index (D-index) of all 11,416 Psychology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 58 ranges running from 30–31 to 144+ D-Index.
  • Janis A. Cannon-Bowers, a Psychology scholar from University of Central Florida, records 56 D-Index - the 64th percentile of the discipline.
  • 64% of ranked Psychology scientists score the same or lower than Janis A. Cannon-Bowers, and about 36% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 48–49 D-Index range, and Janis A. Cannon-Bowers ranks above the median.
  • The most crowded range is 32–33 D-Index, holding 702 scientists (6% of the field).
  • 68% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 58–59 D-Index), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more, 98 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

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
Clint A. Bowers
Clint A. Bowers University of Central Florida
Scott I. Tannenbaum
Scott I. Tannenbaum University at Albany, State University of New York
Stephen M. Fiore
Stephen M. Fiore University of Central Florida
John E. Mathieu
John E. Mathieu University of Connecticut
Nancy J. Cooke
Nancy J. Cooke Arizona State University
Paul E. Spector
Paul E. Spector University of South Florida
Steve W. J. Kozlowski
Steve W. J. Kozlowski University of South Florida
Arthur D. Fisk
Arthur D. Fisk Georgia Institute of Technology
Michael A. Rosen
Michael A. Rosen 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

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