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
Computer Science 40 9387 9117 291 290 244 5889

Jorge Goncalves publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Jorge Goncalves between 2006 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Jorge Goncalves published across 20 years, from 2006 to 2025, averaging 14.4 papers a year. Output peaked at 35 publications in 2019. 39 of the 287 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2006 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 35. Peak 35 publications in 2019. 2006: 1 publication 2007: 1 publication 2008: 1 publication 2009: 0 publications 2010: 0 publications 2011: 3 publications 2012: 2 publications 2013: 14 publications 2014: 22 publications 2015: 13 publications 2016: 24 publications 2017: 26 publications 2018: 14 publications 2019: 35 publications 2020: 27 publications 2021: 28 publications 2022: 19 publications 2023: 18 publications 2024: 22 publications 2025: 17 publications
2006 2025

287 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Jorge Goncalves: publications per year, 2006 to 2025
Year Publications
2006 1
2007 1
2008 1
2009 0
2010 0
2011 3
2012 2
2013 14
2014 22
2015 13
2016 24
2017 26
2018 14
2019 35
2020 27
2021 28
2022 19
2023 18
2024 22
2025 17
Total 287
Download as CSV

Jorge Goncalves 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 Jorge Goncalves sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 97 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 32–41 to 991+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 609. Most scientists, 609, have 142–151 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 242–251 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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
32–41 publications 991+

This scientist: 244 publications — 61st percentile

61% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Computer Science scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 14,188 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
32–41 7
42–51 22
52–61 82
62–71 134
72–81 249
82–91 324
92–101 421
102–111 420
112–121 497
122–131 544
132–141 555
142–151 609
152–161 559
162–171 534
172–181 556
182–191 583
192–201 519
202–211 508
212–221 490
222–231 437
232–241 423
242–251 408 244
252–261 377
262–271 301
272–281 335
282–291 320
292–301 293
302–311 250
312–321 238
322–331 206
332–341 209
342–351 208
352–361 162
362–371 176
372–381 127
382–391 158
392–401 128
402–411 104
412–421 94
422–431 99
432–441 83
442–451 108
452–461 73
462–471 77
472–481 69
482–491 84
492–501 62
502–511 54
512–521 57
522–531 51
532–541 51
542–551 32
552–561 38
562–571 28
572–581 43
582–591 33
592–601 41
602–611 32
612–621 28
622–631 25
632–641 27
642–651 17
652–661 20
662–671 17
672–681 15
682–691 14
692–701 21
702–711 13
712–721 12
722–731 19
732–741 14
742–751 12
752–761 10
762–771 10
772–781 11
782–791 10
792–801 11
802–811 8
812–821 8
822–831 7
832–841 11
842–851 10
852–861 5
862–871 9
872–881 4
882–891 6
892–901 3
902–911 6
912–921 3
922–931 2
932–941 2
942–951 2
952–961 3
962–971 3
972–981 3
982–990 5
991+ 100
Download as CSV

Jorge Goncalves 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 Jorge Goncalves sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600 800
Bar chart with 52 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 131+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 990. Most scientists, 990, have 36–37 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 40–41 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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
30–31 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 40 D-Index — 37th percentile

37% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Computer Science scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 14,188 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 879
32–33 983
34–35 918
36–37 990
38–39 968
40–41 907 40
42–43 821
44–45 763
46–47 689
48–49 543
50–51 543
52–53 518
54–55 500
56–57 458
58–59 400
60–61 337
62–63 308
64–65 292
66–67 249
68–69 213
70–71 192
72–73 189
74–75 165
76–77 139
78–79 119
80–81 121
82–83 113
84–85 88
86–87 87
88–89 75
90–91 69
92–93 57
94–95 46
96–97 38
98–99 34
100–101 36
102–103 27
104–105 37
106–107 18
108–109 31
110–111 19
112–113 16
114–115 12
116–117 20
118–119 15
120–121 5
122–123 20
124–125 8
126–127 5
128–129 7
130 3
131+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

Jorge Goncalves is affiliated with the University of Melbourne in Australia and conducts research primarily in the fields of Computer Science and Social Sciences. Their work spans various subfields including Human-Computer Interaction, Sociology and Political Science, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Artificial Intelligence, and Cognitive Neuroscience.

Their research covers several main topics such as Mobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing, Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts, Misinformation and Its Impacts, Social Media and Politics, Augmented Reality Applications, Tactile and Sensory Interactions, and the Impact of Technology on Adolescents.

Jorge Goncalves has published in a range of academic venues, with notable frequent publication platforms including:

  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
  • Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • ACM Computing Surveys
  • SSRN Electronic Journal

Recent papers authored or co-authored by Jorge Goncalves include:

  • "Behavioral and Physiological Signals-Based Deep Multimodal Approach for Mobile Emotion Recognition", 2021, IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing
  • "Fully-Occluded Target Selection in Virtual Reality", 2020, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
  • "Human-centred artificial intelligence: a contextual morality perspective", 2020, Behaviour and Information Technology
  • "Electronic Monitoring Systems for Hand Hygiene: Systematic Review of Technology", 2021, Journal of Medical Internet Research
  • "A Survey on Task Assignment in Crowdsourcing", 2022, ACM Computing Surveys

The scientist frequently collaborates with the following co-authors:

  • Vassilis Kostakos
  • Zhanna Sarsenbayeva
  • Niels van Berkel
  • Eduardo Velloso
  • Tilman Dingler

Best Publications

  • Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Dynamical Structure Reconstruction of LTI Networks

    Unknown

  • An Empirical Investigation of Mobile Government Adoption in Rural China: A Case Study in Zhejiang Province

    Yong Liu;Hongxiu Li;Vassilis Kostakos;Jorge Goncalves

  • CHI 1994-2013: mapping two decades of intellectual progress through co-word analysis

    Yong Liu;Jorge Goncalves;Denzil Ferreira;Bei Xiao

  • Contextual experience sampling of mobile application micro-usage

    Denzil Ferreira;Jorge Goncalves;Vassilis Kostakos;Louise Barkhuus

  • Are Smartphones Ubiquitous?: An in-depth survey of smartphone adoption by seniors

    Anabela Berenguer;Jorge Goncalves;Simo Hosio;Denzil Ferreira

  • What makes you click: exploring visual signals to entice interaction on public displays

    Hannu Kukka;Heidi Oja;Vassilis Kostakos;Jorge Gonçalves

  • Crowdsourcing on the spot: altruistic use of public displays, feasibility, performance, and behaviours

    Jorge Goncalves;Denzil Ferreira;Simo Hosio;Yong Liu

  • Revisitation analysis of smartphone app use

    Simon L. Jones;Denzil Ferreira;Simo Hosio;Jorge Goncalves

  • Sharing ephemeral information in online social networks: privacy perceptions and behaviours

    Bernardo Reynolds;Jayant Venkatanathan;Jorge Gonçalves;Vassilis Kostakos

  • Gamification of Mobile Experience Sampling Improves Data Quality and Quantity

    Niels van Berkel;Jorge Goncalves;Simo Hosio;Vassilis Kostakos

  • Gaze-Supported 3D Object Manipulation in Virtual Reality

    Difeng Yu;Xueshi Lu;Rongkai Shi;Hai-Ning Liang

  • Situated crowdsourcing using a market model

    Simo Hosio;Jorge Goncalves;Vili Lehdonvirta;Denzil Ferreira

  • Effect of Experience Sampling Schedules on Response Rate and Recall Accuracy of Objective Self-Reports

    Niels van Berkel;Jorge Goncalves;Lauri Lovén;Denzil Ferreira

  • Behavioral and Physiological Signals-Based Deep Multimodal Approach for Mobile Emotion Recognition

    Kangning Yang;Chaofan Wang;Yue Gu;Zhanna Sarsenbayeva

  • Revisiting human-battery interaction with an interactive battery interface

    Denzil Ferreira;Eija Ferreira;Jorge Goncalves;Vassilis Kostakos

  • Crowdsourcing Public Opinion Using Urban Pervasive Technologies: Lessons From Real‐Life Experiments in Oulu

    Simo Hosio;Jorge Goncalves;Vassilis Kostakos;Jukka Riekki

  • A Systematic Assessment of Smartphone Usage Gaps

    Niels van Berkel;Chu Luo;Theodoros Anagnostopoulos;Denzil Ferreira

  • Effect of Information Presentation on Fairness Perceptions of Machine Learning Predictors

    Niels van Berkel;Jorge Goncalves;Daniel Russo;Simo Hosio

  • Fully-Occluded Target Selection in Virtual Reality

    Difeng Yu;Qiushi Zhou;Joshua Newn;Tilman Dingler

  • Game of words: tagging places through crowdsourcing on public displays

    Jorge Goncalves;Simo Hosio;Denzil Ferreira;Vassilis Kostakos

  • Motivating participation and improving quality of contribution in ubiquitous crowdsourcing

    Jorge Goncalves;Simo Hosio;Jakob Rogstadius;Evangelos Karapanos

  • Crowdsourcing Perceptions of Fair Predictors for Machine Learning: A Recidivism Case Study

    Niels van Berkel;Jorge Goncalves;Danula Hettiachchi;Senuri Wijenayake

  • Quantifying Sources and Types of Smartwatch Usage Sessions

    Aku Visuri;Zhanna Sarsenbayeva;Niels van Berkel;Jorge Goncalves

Frequent Co-Authors

Vassilis Kostakos
Vassilis Kostakos University of Melbourne
Simo Hosio
Simo Hosio University of Oulu
Denzil Ferreira
Denzil Ferreira University of Oulu
Eduardo Velloso
Eduardo Velloso University of Melbourne
Timo Ojala
Timo Ojala University of Oulu
Jukka Riekki
Jukka Riekki University of Oulu
Anna L. Cox
Anna L. Cox University College London
Jacob O. Wobbrock
Jacob O. Wobbrock University of Washington
Peter Koval
Peter Koval University of Melbourne
Raja Jurdak
Raja Jurdak Queensland University 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

If you’re considering a future in Computer Science, there are several online education routes to help you meet your goals. Many students start with an online associate degree. This can be a flexible, cost-effective way to gain fundamental skills and prepare for further study or entry-level careers.

For those seeking advanced roles or specialization, earning the best masters degree to get can open doors to high-demand jobs and increased earning potential. Online master’s programs often cater to working professionals looking to upskill or pivot their careers.

Budget is a key concern for many students. Fortunately, there are options for accessing the cheapest online colleges, which help minimize debt without sacrificing quality. Even if your academic history isn’t perfect, you can still find a supportive environment at a college with low gpa admission requirements.

Exploring these flexible, accessible online pathways can help you build a solid Computer Science foundation and launch a successful technology career in the USA.

Best Scientists Citing Jorge Goncalves

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles