World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
57
Citations
13715
World Ranking
3818
National Ranking
1815

John C. Tang 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 John C. Tang 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: 249 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: 559 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: 423 scientists 242–251 publications: 408 scientists 252–261 publications: 377 scientists 262–271 publications: 301 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: 168 publications — 34th percentile

34% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

John C. Tang 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 John C. Tang sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 879 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 983 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 918 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 990 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 968 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 907 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 821 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 763 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 689 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 543 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 543 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 518 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: 57 D-Index — 74th percentile

74% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

John C. Tang is a researcher primarily affiliated with Microsoft in the United States. Their work focuses on the intersection of computer science and human-computer interaction, with an emphasis on accessibility, telework, and inclusive technology design. Tang has contributed extensively to topics such as virtual reality applications, assistive technology in communication and mobility, and innovative human-technology interaction.

Their published research spans several prominent venues, including:

  • Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology
  • Communications of the ACM
  • Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)
  • Journal of Global Information Management

Recent papers authored or co-authored by Tang include:

  • "Towards Accessible Remote Work" (2021) in Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • "Understanding the Telework Experience of People with Disabilities" (2021) in Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • "Perspectives: Creating Inclusive and Equitable Hybrid Meeting Experiences" (2023) in Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

Co-authors frequently collaborating with Tang include:

  • Kori Inkpen
  • Sasa Junuzovic
  • Maitraye Das
  • Andrew D. Wilson
  • Sean Rintel

Their research contributions are primarily situated within computer science, with subfields that cover:

  • Human-Computer Interaction
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Occupational Therapy
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology

Main thematic areas addressed by Tang include:

  • Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
  • Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
  • Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • AI in Service Interactions
  • Digital Economy and Work Transformation
  • Work-Family Balance Challenges
  • Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development

John C. Tang's work contributes to a broader understanding of how technology can be devised and applied to support inclusive work environments and enhance accessibility. Their exploration of telework experiences for people with disabilities and inclusive hybrid meeting designs aims to address evolving challenges in the digital economy and workplace transformations.

Best Publications

  • System and method providing a computer user interface enabling access to distributed workgroup members

    John Tang;Ellen Isaacs;Trevor Morris;Thomas Rodriguez

  • Findings from observational studies of collaborative work

    John C. Tang

  • Videodraw: a video interface for collaborative drawing

    John C. Tang;Scott L. Minneman

  • Liveboard: a large interactive display supporting group meetings, presentations, and remote collaboration

    Scott Elrod;Richard Bruce;Rich Gold;David Goldberg

  • What video can and cannot do for collaboration: a case study

    Ellen A. Isaacs;John C. Tang

  • ConNexus to awarenex: extending awareness to mobile users

    John C. Tang;Nicole Yankelovich;James Begole;Max Van Kleek

  • VideoWhiteboard: video shadows to support remote collaboration

    John C. Tang;Scott Minneman

  • Why Do Users Like Video? Studies of Multimedia-Supported Collaboration

    John C. Tang

  • Supporting distributed groups with a Montage of lightweight interactions

    John C. Tang;Ellen A. Isaacs;Monica Rua

  • Work rhythms: analyzing visualizations of awareness histories of distributed groups

    James "Bo" Begole;John C. Tang;Randall B. Smith;Nicole Yankelovich

  • Mechanism for reciprocal awareness of intent to initiate and end interaction among remote users

    John C. Tang;Nicole Y. Mordecai;James M. A. Begole;Janak R. Bhalodia

  • When can i expect an email response? a study of rhythms in email usage

    Joshua R. Tyler;John C. Tang

  • What Makes Live Events Engaging on Facebook Live, Periscope, and Snapchat

    Oliver L. Haimson;John C. Tang

  • Meerkat and Periscope: I Stream, You Stream, Apps Stream for Live Streams

    John C. Tang;Gina Venolia;Kori M. Inkpen

  • Piazza: a desktop environment supporting impromptu and planned interactions

    Ellen A. Isaacs;John C. Tang;Trevor Morris

  • A framework for understanding the workspace activity of design teams

    John C. Tang;Larry J. Leifer

  • Video computational shared drawing space

    John C. Tang;Scott L. Minneman;Sara A. Bly;Steve R. Harrison

  • What video can and can't do for collaboration: a case study

    Ellen A. Isaacs;John C. Tang

  • System and method for providing spatially distributed device interaction

    John C. Tang;Nicole Y. Mordecai;James M. A. Begole;Francis C. Li

  • Montage: providing teleproximity for distributed groups

    John C. Tang;Monica Rua

  • Method and system for inferring and applying coordination patterns from individual work and communication activity

    James Begole;John Tang;Nicole Mordecai;Frank Richichi

Frequent Co-Authors

Gina Venolia
Gina Venolia Microsoft (United States)
Kori Inkpen
Kori Inkpen Microsoft (United States)
Michael Muller
Michael Muller IBM (United States)
Thomas P. Moran
Thomas P. Moran IBM (United States)
Warren B. Jackson
Warren B. Jackson Palo Alto Research Center
George G. Robertson
George G. Robertson Microsoft (United States)
Zhengyou Zhang
Zhengyou Zhang Tencent (China)
Hrvoje Benko
Hrvoje Benko Facebook (United States)
Edward Cutrell
Edward Cutrell Microsoft (United States)
Bongshin Lee
Bongshin Lee Microsoft (United States)

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 computer science opens doors to a variety of online degrees and career options. Many students begin with an associate degree in 6 months online. These fast-track programs can provide a strong foundation and allow you to quickly enter the job market or continue toward a higher degree.

For those seeking advanced credentials, there are cheapest online phd programs available in technical and interdisciplinary fields. Pursuing a doctoral degree online makes it easier for professionals to balance work and study, but it’s important to consider program accreditation and support services.

Similarly, educators or those in leadership can benefit from edd online programs that are designed for fast completion and real-world impact, equipping graduates with the skills to innovate in educational or corporate environments.

If you are interested in business or entrepreneurship, pursuing an online college business degree can complement your technical skills. Many business programs offer flexibility and affordability, allowing you to tailor your education to fit your career goals in tech or management.

Best Scientists Citing John C. Tang

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles