World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
39
Citations
12109
World Ranking
8391
National Ranking
4478

John P. Forsyth 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 John P. Forsyth 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: 105 publications — 23rd percentile

23% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

John P. Forsyth 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 John P. Forsyth 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: 39 D-Index — 27th percentile

27% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

John P. Forsyth is affiliated with the University at Albany, State University of New York in the United States. Their research primarily spans the field of psychology, with a focus on clinical psychology and experimental and cognitive psychology. Forsyth's work also includes interdisciplinary contributions to materials chemistry, civil and structural engineering, and metals and alloys.

The scientist's recent publications demonstrate a range of topics within psychology and related applied fields. Notable papers include "Using meditation in a control vs. acceptance context: A preliminary evaluation of relations with anxiety, depression, and indices of well-being" (2022, Journal of Clinical Psychology), "Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) for Problematic Anger: A Case Study" (2022, Clinical Case Studies), "Inhibitor mixture for reducing bacteria growth and corrosion on marine steel" (2022, Australian Journal of Chemistry), "The relative importance of transdiagnostic factors associated with problematic smartphone use" (2022, Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science), and "Acceptance and Commitment Teletherapy for Mixed Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study" (2024, Clinical Case Studies).

Forsyth's frequent coauthors reflect ongoing collaborative relationships in the research community. Key coauthors include Eric D. Tifft, Shannon B. Underwood, Max Z. Roberts, Rainier Catubig, and Agnes Michalczyk.

The scientist's work has been published in a variety of academic venues, with repeated contributions to Clinical Case Studies, Journal of Clinical Psychology, Australian Journal of Chemistry, and Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science.

Forsyth's research explores key topics including:

  • Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Corrosion Behavior and Inhibition
  • Concrete Corrosion and Durability
  • Hydrogen embrittlement and corrosion behaviors in metals

Apart from articles, Forsyth has also authored a book titled Angst kommt und geht published by Hogrefe Verlag in 2020.

Best Publications

  • Measuring experiential avoidance: A preliminary test of a working model

    Steven C. Hayes;Kirk Strosahl;Kelly G. Wilson;Richard T. Bissett

  • Experiential avoidance as a generalized psychological vulnerability: comparisons with coping and emotion regulation strategies.

    Todd B. Kashdan;Velma Barrios;John P. Forsyth;Michael F. Steger

  • Self-compassion is a better predictor than mindfulness of symptom severity and quality of life in mixed anxiety and depression.

    Nicholas T. Van Dam;Sean C. Sheppard;John P. Forsyth;Mitch Earleywine

  • Emotion Regulation and the Anxiety Disorders: An Integrative Review.

    Josh M. Cisler;Bunmi O. Olatunji;Matthew T. Feldner;John P. Forsyth

  • Tonic Immobility as an Evolved Predator Defense: Implications for Sexual Assault Survivors

    Brian P. Marx;John P. Forsyth;Gordon G. Gallup;Tiffany Fusé

  • Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Anxiety Disorders: A Practitioner's Treatment Guide to Using Mindfulness, Acceptance, and Values-Based Behavior Change Strategies

    Georg H. Eifert;John P. Forsyth

  • Anxiety sensitivity, controllability, and experiential avoidance and their relation to drug of choice and addiction severity in a residential sample of substance-abusing veterans.

    John P. Forsyth;Jefferson D. Parker;Carlos G. Finlay

  • Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Anxiety Disorders: Three Case Studies Exemplifying a Unified Treatment Protocol

    Georg H. Eifert;John P. Forsyth;Joanna Arch;Emmanuel Espejo

  • Emotional avoidance and panicogenic responding to a biological challenge procedure

    Maria Karekla;John P. Forsyth;Megan M. Kelly

  • Tonic immobility and childhood sexual abuse: a preliminary report evaluating the sequela of rape-induced paralysis.

    Jennifer M. Heidt;Brian P. Marx;John P. Forsyth

  • The stress of patient suicidal behavior during clinical training: Incidence, impact, and recovery.

    Phillip M. Kleespies;Walter E. Penk;John P. Forsyth

  • Factor structure of the Tonic Immobility Scale in female sexual assault survivors: an exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis

    Tiffany Fusé;John P. Forsyth;Brian Marx;Gordon G. Gallup

  • Evaluative differential conditioning of disgust: a sticky form of relational learning that is resistant to extinction.

    Bunmi O. Olatunji;John P. Forsyth;Ancy Cherian

  • The structure of perceived emotional control: Psychometric properties of a revised anxiety control questionnaire

    Timothy A. Brown;Kamila S. White;John P. Forsyth;David H. Barlow

  • Anxiety Sensitivity Dimensions in the Prediction of Body Vigilance and Emotional Avoidance

    Michael J. Zvolensky;John P. Forsyth

  • The Believability of Anxious Feelings and Thoughts Questionnaire (BAFT): a psychometric evaluation of cognitive fusion in a nonclinical and highly anxious community sample.

    Kristin N. Herzberg;Sean C. Sheppard;John P. Forsyth;Marcus Credé

  • Transformation of Avoidance Response Functions in Accordance with Same and Opposite Relational Frames.

    Simon Dymond;Bryaan Roche;John P. Forsyth;Robert Whelan

  • Sex differences in salivary cortisol in response to acute stressors among healthy participants, in recreational or pathological gamblers, and in those with posttraumatic stress disorder.

    Jason J. Paris;Christine Franco;Ruthlyn Sodano;Brian Freidenberg

  • Sex differences in response to a panicogenic challenge procedure: an experimental evaluation of panic vulnerability in a non-clinical sample.

    Megan M. Kelly;John P. Forsyth;Maria Karekla

  • Response intensity in content-specific fear conditioning comparing 20% versus 13% CO2-enriched air as unconditioned stimuli.

    John P. Forsyth;Georg H. Eifert

Frequent Co-Authors

Michael J. Zvolensky
Michael J. Zvolensky University of Houston
Maria Karekla
Maria Karekla University of Cyprus
Matthew T. Feldner
Matthew T. Feldner University of Arkansas at Fayetteville
Mitch Earleywine
Mitch Earleywine University at Albany, State University of New York
Carl W. Lejuez
Carl W. Lejuez Stony Brook University
Bryan Roche
Bryan Roche National University of Ireland, Maynooth
Bunmi O. Olatunji
Bunmi O. Olatunji Vanderbilt University
Norman B. Schmidt
Norman B. Schmidt Florida State University
Gordon G. Gallup
Gordon G. Gallup University at Albany, State University of New York
Simon Dymond
Simon Dymond Swansea University

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 psychology or counseling can open many doors for students seeking flexibility, affordability, and practical career pathways. With the rising demand for mental health professionals, online counseling programs are increasingly popular across the United States.

If you're searching for affordable options, several regions stand out. Students based in Pennsylvania can consider affordable online counseling degrees in Pennsylvania, which offer accessible pathways for state residents and beyond. Those located closer to the city may want to review affordable online counseling programs in Philadelphia for specialized local options.

Prospective students in the southern U.S. can explore affordable online counseling degrees in Texas, which are known for both quality and cost-effectiveness. For those making price a top priority, you can compare the cheapest online counseling degrees in USA to find nationwide solutions suited to your needs.

Graduates from these programs often find work in roles such as school counselor, mental health therapist, substance abuse counselor, or case manager. Whether you want to study regionally or nationwide, a broad range of affordable online counseling degrees can help you take the next step toward a fulfilling career in psychology and mental health services.

Best Scientists Citing John P. Forsyth

Trending Scientists