World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Psychology 49 5553 5159 3032 2750 103 16484

Jason T. Newsom publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Jason T. Newsom between 1992 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Jason T. Newsom published across 34 years, from 1992 to 2025, averaging 4.2 papers a year. Output peaked at 22 publications in 2023. 8 of the 143 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1992 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 22. Peak 22 publications in 2023. 1992: 1 publication 1993: 1 publication 1994: 0 publications 1995: 3 publications 1996: 6 publications 1997: 5 publications 1998: 2 publications 1999: 2 publications 2000: 0 publications 2001: 1 publication 2002: 5 publications 2003: 6 publications 2004: 5 publications 2005: 3 publications 2006: 2 publications 2007: 6 publications 2008: 3 publications 2009: 0 publications 2010: 1 publication 2011: 0 publications 2012: 6 publications 2013: 3 publications 2014: 3 publications 2015: 14 publications 2016: 1 publication 2017: 3 publications 2018: 3 publications 2019: 7 publications 2020: 8 publications 2021: 5 publications 2022: 8 publications 2023: 22 publications 2024: 3 publications 2025: 5 publications
1992 2025

143 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Jason T. Newsom: publications per year, 1992 to 2025
Year Publications
1992 1
1993 1
1994 0
1995 3
1996 6
1997 5
1998 2
1999 2
2000 0
2001 1
2002 5
2003 6
2004 5
2005 3
2006 2
2007 6
2008 3
2009 0
2010 1
2011 0
2012 6
2013 3
2014 3
2015 14
2016 1
2017 3
2018 3
2019 7
2020 8
2021 5
2022 8
2023 22
2024 3
2025 5
Total 143
Download as CSV

Jason T. Newsom 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 Jason T. Newsom 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, 101–110 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: 103 publications — 22nd percentile

22% 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
101–110 736 103
111–120 686
121–130 670
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

Jason T. Newsom 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 Jason T. Newsom 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, 48–49 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: 49 D-Index — 52nd percentile

52% 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 49
50–51 445
52–53 390
54–55 408
56–57 345
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

Overview

Jason T. Newsom is affiliated with Portland State University in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on Medicine and Social Sciences, with significant contributions in the subfields of Epidemiology, Health, Economics and Econometrics, General Health Professions, and Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology.

The main topics covered in their work include:

  • Chronic Disease Management Strategies
  • Health disparities and outcomes
  • Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Aging and Gerontology Research
  • Global Health Care Issues

Jason T. Newsom has contributed to several recent publications, including:

  • "Racial and Ethnic Differences in Multimorbidity Changes Over Time," 2021, Medical Care
  • "Trajectories of cognitive functioning in later life: Disparities by race/ethnicity, educational attainment, sex, and multimorbidity combinations," 2022, SSM - Population Health
  • "Multidimensional trajectories of multimorbidity, functional status, cognitive performance, and depressive symptoms among diverse groups of older adults," 2022, Journal of Multimorbidity and Comorbidity
  • "Depressive Multimorbidity and Trajectories of Functional Status among Older Americans: Differences by Racial/Ethnic Group," 2022, Journal of the American Medical Directors Association
  • "Performance of Latent Growth Curve Models with Binary Variables," 2020, Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal

Their frequent co-authors include:

  • Ana Quiñones
  • Heather Allore
  • Corey Nagel
  • Anda Botoseneanu
  • David A. Dorr

Newsom's research has been published consistently in venues such as Innovation in Aging, The Journals of Gerontology Series A, SSM - Population Health, BMC Geriatrics, and Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal.

This body of work reflects a multidisciplinary approach, integrating epidemiological and economic perspectives to explore health disparities, chronic disease management, and aging-related outcomes.

Best Publications

  • Inventory of Complicated Grief: A scale to measure maladaptive symptoms of loss

    Holly G. Prigerson;Paul K. Maciejewski;Charles F. Reynolds;Andrew J. Bierhals

  • Personal Need for Structure: Individual Differences in the Desire for Simple Structure

    Steven L. Neuberg;Jason T. Newsom

  • Preference for Consistency: The Development of a Valid Measure and the Discovery of Surprising Behavioral Implications

    Robert B. Cialdini;Melanie R. Trost;Jason T. Newsom

  • Traumatic grief as a risk factor for mental and physical morbidity.

    Holly G. Prigerson;Andrew J. Bierhals;Stanislav V. Kasl;Charles F. Reynolds

  • Social support as a mediator in the relation between functional status and quality of life in older adults.

    Jason T. Newsom;Richard Schulz

  • Health effects of caregiving: The caregiver health effects study: An ancillary study of the cardiovascular health study

    Richard Schulz;Jason Newsom;Maurice Mittelmark;Lynda Burton

  • The association between length of residence and obesity among Hispanic immigrants

    Mark S. Kaplan;Nathalie Huguet;Jason T. Newsom;Bentson H. McFarland

  • A longitudinal study of the effects of dual-earner couples' utilization of family-friendly workplace supports on work and family outcomes

    Leslie B. Hammer;Margaret B. Neal;Jason T. Newsom;Krista J. Brockwood

  • Complicated grief as a disorder distinct from bereavement-related depression and anxiety: a replication study.

    H G Prigerson;A J Bierhals;S V Kasl;C F Reynolds rd

  • Suicide among male veterans: a prospective population‐based study

    Mark S Kaplan;Nathalie Huguet;Bentson H McFarland;Jason T Newsom

  • Longitudinal Structural Equation Modeling: A Comprehensive Introduction

    Jason T. Newsom

  • Understanding the Relative Importance of Positive and Negative Social Exchanges: Examining Specific Domains and Appraisals

    Jason T. Newsom;Karen S. Rook;Masami Nishishiba;Dara H. Sorkin

  • Preventive health behaviors among spousal caregivers.

    Lynda C. Burton;Jason T. Newsom;Richard Schulz;Calvin H. Hirsch

  • Demographic and psychosocial correlates of physical activity in late life

    Mark S Kaplan;Jason T Newsom;Bentson H McFarland;Leining Lu

  • State and trait negative affect as predictors of objective and subjective symptoms of respiratory viral infections.

    Sheldon Cohen;William J. Doyle;David P. Skoner;Philip Fireman

  • The Relative Importance of Three Domains of Positive and Negative Social Exchanges: A Longitudinal Model With Comparable Measures

    Jason T. Newsom;Masami Nishishiba;David L. Morgan;Karen S. Rook

  • The health consciousness myth: implications of the near independence of major health behaviors in the North American population.

    Jason T. Newsom;Bentson H. McFarland;Mark S. Kaplan;Nathalie Huguet

  • Racial/ethnic differences in multimorbidity development and chronic disease accumulation for middle-aged adults.

    Ana R. Quiñones;Anda Botoseneanu;Sheila Markwardt;Corey L. Nagel

  • Caregiving from the recipient's perspective: Negative reactions to being helped.

    Jason T. Newsom;Richard Schulz

  • Health behavior change following chronic illness in middle and later life

    Jason T. Newsom;Nathalie Huguet;Michael J. McCarthy;Pamela Ramage-Morin

  • Stable negative social exchanges and health.

    Jason T. Newsom;Tyrae L. Mahan;Karen S. Rook;Neal Krause

Frequent Co-Authors

Mark S. Kaplan
Mark S. Kaplan University of California, Los Angeles
Karen S. Rook
Karen S. Rook University of California, Irvine
Richard Schulz
Richard Schulz University of Pittsburgh
Holly G. Prigerson
Holly G. Prigerson Cornell University
Charles F. Reynolds
Charles F. Reynolds University of Pittsburgh
Neal Krause
Neal Krause University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
M. Katherine Shear
M. Katherine Shear Columbia University
Lynn M. Martire
Lynn M. Martire Pennsylvania State University
David W. Oslin
David W. Oslin University of Pennsylvania
Ellen Frank
Ellen Frank University of Pittsburgh

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

Studying psychology in the USA opens the door to a variety of rewarding career paths, including becoming a licensed Marriage and Family Therapist (MFT). Many aspiring MFTs choose online degrees to balance their studies with work or family commitments. However, it’s important to recognize that each state—and even individual cities—has its own specific education and certification requirements for MFTs.

For example, those interested in practicing in Virginia should review the Chesapeake mft education requirements, while future therapists in Illinois can refer to the Chicago mft certification requirements. Similarly, counseling professionals targeting a career on the West Coast should be aware of the Chula Vista mft education requirements, and those in Ohio can consult the Cincinnati mft education requirements.

Before selecting an online psychology degree program, be sure to check your state and city’s regulations. Understanding these requirements helps you choose the best educational pathway and ensures you’re ready for certification and licensure in your intended location.

Best Scientists Citing Jason T. Newsom

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles