World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
70
Citations
26459
World Ranking
1839
National Ranking
935

James D. Herbsleb publication distribution in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Computer Science in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where James D. Herbsleb sits on this spectrum.

32–41 publications: 7 scientists 42–51 publications: 22 scientists 52–61 publications: 82 scientists 62–71 publications: 134 scientists 72–81 publications: 250 scientists 82–91 publications: 324 scientists 92–101 publications: 421 scientists 102–111 publications: 420 scientists 112–121 publications: 497 scientists 122–131 publications: 544 scientists 132–141 publications: 555 scientists 142–151 publications: 609 scientists 152–161 publications: 560 scientists 162–171 publications: 534 scientists 172–181 publications: 556 scientists 182–191 publications: 583 scientists 192–201 publications: 519 scientists 202–211 publications: 508 scientists 212–221 publications: 490 scientists 222–231 publications: 437 scientists 232–241 publications: 424 scientists 242–251 publications: 408 scientists 252–261 publications: 378 scientists 262–271 publications: 300 scientists 272–281 publications: 335 scientists 282–291 publications: 320 scientists 292–301 publications: 293 scientists 302–311 publications: 250 scientists 312–321 publications: 238 scientists 322–331 publications: 206 scientists 332–341 publications: 209 scientists 342–351 publications: 208 scientists 352–361 publications: 162 scientists 362–371 publications: 176 scientists 372–381 publications: 127 scientists 382–391 publications: 158 scientists 392–401 publications: 128 scientists 402–411 publications: 104 scientists 412–421 publications: 94 scientists 422–431 publications: 99 scientists 432–441 publications: 83 scientists 442–451 publications: 108 scientists 452–461 publications: 73 scientists 462–471 publications: 77 scientists 472–481 publications: 69 scientists 482–491 publications: 84 scientists 492–501 publications: 62 scientists 502–511 publications: 54 scientists 512–521 publications: 57 scientists 522–531 publications: 51 scientists 532–541 publications: 51 scientists 542–551 publications: 32 scientists 552–561 publications: 38 scientists 562–571 publications: 28 scientists 572–581 publications: 43 scientists 582–591 publications: 33 scientists 592–601 publications: 41 scientists 602–611 publications: 32 scientists 612–621 publications: 28 scientists 622–631 publications: 25 scientists 632–641 publications: 27 scientists 642–651 publications: 17 scientists 652–661 publications: 20 scientists 662–671 publications: 17 scientists 672–681 publications: 15 scientists 682–691 publications: 14 scientists 692–701 publications: 21 scientists 702–711 publications: 13 scientists 712–721 publications: 12 scientists 722–731 publications: 19 scientists 732–741 publications: 14 scientists 742–751 publications: 12 scientists 752–761 publications: 10 scientists 762–771 publications: 10 scientists 772–781 publications: 11 scientists 782–791 publications: 10 scientists 792–801 publications: 11 scientists 802–811 publications: 8 scientists 812–821 publications: 8 scientists 822–831 publications: 7 scientists 832–841 publications: 11 scientists 842–851 publications: 10 scientists 852–861 publications: 5 scientists 862–871 publications: 9 scientists 872–881 publications: 4 scientists 882–891 publications: 6 scientists 892–901 publications: 3 scientists 902–911 publications: 6 scientists 912–921 publications: 3 scientists 922–931 publications: 2 scientists 932–941 publications: 2 scientists 942–951 publications: 2 scientists 952–961 publications: 3 scientists 962–971 publications: 3 scientists 972–981 publications: 3 scientists 982–990 publications: 5 scientists 991+ publications: 100 scientists
32 publications 991+

This scientist: 190 publications — 43rd percentile

43% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more.

James D. Herbsleb D-index placement in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Computer Science scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where James D. Herbsleb sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 879 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 984 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 918 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 990 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 969 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 907 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 821 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 765 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 689 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 543 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 543 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 517 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 500 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 458 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 400 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 337 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 308 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 292 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 249 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 213 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 192 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 189 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 165 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 139 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 119 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 121 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 113 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 88 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 87 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 75 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 69 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 57 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 46 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 38 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 34 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 36 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 27 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 37 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 18 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 31 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 19 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 16 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 20 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 15 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 5 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 20 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 8 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 5 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 7 scientists 130 D-Index: 3 scientists 131+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 70 D-Index — 87th percentile

87% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more.

Overview

James D. Herbsleb is affiliated with Carnegie Mellon University in the United States. Their research spans multiple aspects of computer science with a particular emphasis on the intersections of software engineering, education, and the social dimensions of technology.

The scientist has published extensively across several key topics including:

  • Biomedical and Engineering Education
  • Open Source Software Innovations
  • Software Engineering Research
  • Mobile Learning in Education
  • Educational Games and Gamification
  • Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Wikis in Education and Collaboration

James D. Herbsleb's publications feature prominently in a variety of venues. Frequent publication outlets include:

  • Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
  • ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
  • 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency

The scientist has contributed to the following recent papers:

  • When and How to Make Breaking Changes (2021), ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology
  • Limits and Possibilities for "Ethical AI" in Open Source: A Study of Deepfakes (2022), 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency
  • How to Support Newcomers in Scientific Hackathons - An Action Research Study on Expert Mentoring (2020), Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • What Happens to All These Hackathon Projects? (2020), Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • Gender and Participation in Open Source Software Development (2022), Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

Their scholarly work largely falls within the broad field of computer science and its applications, with the following areas receiving notable attention:

  • Computer Science Applications
  • Information Systems
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Communication
  • Information Systems and Management

Collaboration is a significant aspect of their research activity. Frequent co-authors include:

  • Alexander Nolte
  • Audris Mockus
  • Tapajit Dey
  • Laura Dabbish
  • Bogdan Vasilescu

Best Publications

  • Two case studies of open source software development: Apache and Mozilla

    Audris Mockus;Roy T. Fielding;James D. Herbsleb

  • Global software development

    J.D. Herbsleb;D. Moitra

  • Social coding in GitHub: transparency and collaboration in an open software repository

    Laura Dabbish;Colleen Stuart;Jason Tsay;Jim Herbsleb

  • An empirical study of speed and communication in globally distributed software development

    J.D. Herbsleb;A. Mockus

  • Global Software Engineering: The Future of Socio-technical Coordination

    J.D. Herbsleb

  • A case study of open source software development: the Apache server

    Audris Mockus;Roy T. Fielding;James Herbsleb

  • Splitting the organization and integrating the code: Conway's law revisited

    James D. Herbsleb;Rebecca E. Grinter

  • Software quality and the Capability Maturity Model

    James Herbsleb;David Zubrow;Dennis Goldenson;Will Hayes

  • Team Knowledge and Coordination in Geographically Distributed Software Development

    J. Espinosa;Sandra Slaughter;Robert Kraut;James Herbsleb

  • Distance, dependencies, and delay in a global collaboration

    James D. Herbsleb;Audris Mockus;Thomas A. Finholt;Rebecca E. Grinter

  • Familiarity, Complexity, and Team Performance in Geographically Distributed Software Development

    J. Alberto Espinosa;Sandra A. Slaughter;Robert E. Kraut;James D. Herbsleb

  • An empirical study of global software development: distance and speed

    James D. Herbsleb;Audris Mockus;Thomas A. Finholt;Rebecca E. Grinter

  • The geography of coordination: dealing with distance in R&D work

    Rebecca E. Grinter;James D. Herbsleb;Dewayne E. Perry

  • Architectures, coordination, and distance: Conway's law and beyond

    J.D. Herbsleb;R.E. Grinter

  • Identification of coordination requirements: implications for the Design of collaboration and awareness tools

    Marcelo Cataldo;Patrick A. Wagstrom;James D. Herbsleb;Kathleen M. Carley

  • Influence of social and technical factors for evaluating contribution in GitHub

    Jason Tsay;Laura Dabbish;James Herbsleb

  • Socio-technical congruence: a framework for assessing the impact of technical and work dependencies on software development productivity

    Marcelo Cataldo;James D. Herbsleb;Kathleen M. Carley

  • Introducing instant messaging and chat in the workplace

    James D. Herbsleb;David L. Atkins;David G. Boyer;Mark Handel

  • Software Dependencies, Work Dependencies, and Their Impact on Failures

    M. Cataldo;A. Mockus;J.A. Roberts;J.D. Herbsleb

  • Global software development at siemens: experience from nine projects

    James D. Herbsleb;Daniel J. Paulish;Matthew Bass

  • Expertise Browser: a quantitative approach to identifying expertise

    Audris Mockus;James D. Herbsleb

Frequent Co-Authors

Audris Mockus
Audris Mockus University of Tennessee at Knoxville
Laura Dabbish
Laura Dabbish Carnegie Mellon University
Rebecca E. Grinter
Rebecca E. Grinter Georgia Institute of Technology
Kathleen M. Carley
Kathleen M. Carley Carnegie Mellon University
James Howison
James Howison The University of Texas at Austin
Gary M. Olson
Gary M. Olson University of California, Irvine
Carolyn Penstein Rosé
Carolyn Penstein Rosé Carnegie Mellon University
Mary Shaw
Mary Shaw Carnegie Mellon University
Robert E. Kraut
Robert E. Kraut Carnegie Mellon University
Sandra A. Slaughter
Sandra A. Slaughter 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

Exploring online degrees in Computer Science opens a wide range of flexible options in education and future careers. Many students start with a two-year program; for those seeking a faster route, researching what is the easiest associate's degree to get can provide practical entry-points into the tech field.

Affordability is a key concern for many, with institutions like the university of north georgia offering reputable and cost-friendly online programs. For those looking for wider choices, browsing nationally accredited online colleges ensures that students select programs meeting recognized educational standards.

Computer Science also overlaps with creative fields such as gaming. Students interested in interactive media or game creation should consider a game design degree to launch a specialized career in this booming industry. With these options, students can pursue an online pathway that fits their goals and budget, while building skills for a variety of tech-driven careers.

Best Scientists Citing James D. Herbsleb

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles