World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
33
Citations
4194
World Ranking
12750
National Ranking
5144

Kay Connelly 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 Kay Connelly 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: 119 publications — 14th percentile

14% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Kay Connelly 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 Kay Connelly 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: 33 D-Index — 13th percentile

13% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Kay Connelly is affiliated with Indiana University in the United States and specializes in interdisciplinary research spanning Medicine, Social Sciences, and Computer Science. Their work particularly focuses on the intersection of technology and health, examining how innovative human-technology interactions can support various aspects of well-being.

Their main fields of study include:

  • Medicine
  • Social Sciences
  • Computer Science

Within these broader domains, Connelly's research engages with multiple subfields such as General Health Professions, Demography, Human-Computer Interaction, Clinical Psychology, and Applied Psychology.

The diverse topics covered in their work include:

  • Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Aging and Gerontology Research
  • Physical Activity and Health

Kay Connelly has contributed to several scholarly articles, with recent publications including:

  • "I hope I never need one": Unpacking Stigma in Aging in Place Technology, 2022, CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
  • Hugging with a Shower Curtain: Older Adults' Social Support Realities During the COVID-19 Pandemic, 2021, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • Evaluation framework for selecting wearable activity monitors for research, 2021, mHealth
  • How do I compare to the other people?: Older Adults' Perspectives on Personal Smart Home Data for Self-Management, 2023, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • Challenges, Tensions, and Opportunities in Designing Ecosystems to Support the Management of Complex Health Needs, 2022, CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts

The most frequent publication venues for Connelly's work include:

  • Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
  • mHealth
  • CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research

Frequent collaborative partnerships appear with the following coauthors:

  • Novia Nurain
  • Clara Caldeira
  • Chia-Fang Chung
  • Katie A. Siek
  • Tom Ongwere

Kay Connelly's research draws on themes of aging, health management, and the role of technology in facilitating better health outcomes. Their investigation into wearable activity monitors and smart home data represents an intersection of practical health monitoring with user experience design tailored for older adult populations.

Best Publications

  • Fat finger worries: how older and younger users physically interact with PDAs

    Katie A. Siek;Yvonne Rogers;Kay H. Connelly

  • Toward total quality of experience: A QoE model in a communication ecosystem

    Khalil Ur Rehman Laghari;Kay Connelly

  • Why it's worth the hassle: the value of in-situ studies when designing Ubicomp

    Yvonne Rogers;Kay Connelly;Lenore Tedesco;William Hazlewood

  • Enhancing learning: a study of how mobile devices can facilitate sensemaking

    Yvonne Rogers;Kay Connelly;William Hazlewood;Lenore Tedesco

  • Privacy, Technology, and Aging: A Proposed Framework

    Lesa Lorenzen-Huber;Mary Boutain;L. Jean Camp;Kalpana Shankar

  • Context-aware telephony: privacy preferences and sharing patterns

    Ashraf Khalil;Kay Connelly

  • Privacy Concerns and Behaviors of People with Visual Impairments

    Tousif Ahmed;Roberto Hoyle;Kay Connelly;David Crandall

  • Encouraging physical activity in teens Can technology help reduce barriers to physical activity in adolescent girls

    T. Toscos;A. Faber;K. Connelly;A.M. Upoma

  • Mobile interface design for low-literacy populations

    Beenish M. Chaudry;Kay H. Connelly;Katie A. Siek;Janet L. Welch

  • Why It’s Worth the Hassle: The Value of In-Situ Studies When Designing Ubicomp: (Nominated for the Best Paper Award)

    Yvonne Rogers;Kay Connelly;Lenore Tedesco;William Hazlewood

  • Best intentions: health monitoring technology and children

    Tammy Toscos;Kay Connelly;Yvonne Rogers

  • When Do We Eat? An Evaluation of Food Items Input into an Electronic Food Monitoring Application

    K.A. Siek;K.H. Connelly;Y. Rogers;P. Rohwer

  • A Guide to Using Asynchronous Remote Communities (ARC) for Researching Distributed Populations

    Haley MacLeod;Ben Jelen;Annu Prabhakar;Lora Oehlberg

  • Designing Health and Fitness Apps with Older Adults: Examining the Value of Experience-Based Co-Design

    Christina N. Harrington;Lauren Wilcox;Kay Connelly;Wendy Rogers

  • Issues in evaluating ambient displays in the wild: two case studies

    William R. Hazlewood;Erik Stolterman;Kay Connelly

  • An offline mobile nutrition monitoring intervention for varying-literacy patients receiving hemodialysis: a pilot study examining usage and usability.

    Kay Connelly;Katie A Siek;Beenish Chaudry;Josette Jones

  • Improving cell phone awareness by using calendar information

    Ashraf Khalil;Kay Connelly

  • How In-Home Technologies Mediate Caregiving Relationships in Later Life

    Lesa Lorenzen Huber;Kalpana Shankar;Kelly Caine;Kay Connelly

  • Evaluating Pervasive and Ubiquitous Systems

    K. Connelly;K.A. Siek;I. Mulder;G. Stevenson

  • Rare World: Towards Technology for Rare Diseases

    Haley MacLeod;Kim Oakes;Danika Geisler;Kay Connelly

  • Asynchronous remote communities (ARC) for researching distributed populations

    Haley MacLeod;Ben Jelen;Annu Prabhakar;Lora Oehlberg

Frequent Co-Authors

Yvonne Rogers
Yvonne Rogers University College London
David J. Crandall
David J. Crandall Indiana University
Apu Kapadia
Apu Kapadia Indiana University
Beth Plale
Beth Plale Indiana University
Daqing Zhang
Daqing Zhang Peking University
Andrew A. Chien
Andrew A. Chien University of Chicago
Jesus Favela
Jesus Favela Center for Scientific Research and Higher Education at Ensenada
Elizabeth D. Mynatt
Elizabeth D. Mynatt Northeastern University
Erik Stolterman
Erik Stolterman Indiana University
Wendy A. Rogers
Wendy A. Rogers University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

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 in the USA opens the door to a variety of online degrees and flexible career paths. For those seeking a quicker route, a fast track computer science degree offers accelerated coursework, helping you enter the workforce sooner without compromising the quality of your education.

Many students are also interested in fields that intersect with computer science. For example, an online environmental engineering degree allows you to tackle pressing global challenges linked to technology and sustainability. Those more inclined toward design and innovation can consider the mechanical engineering degree online cost to find affordable options for a highly versatile career.

If you're passionate about the foundations of science, a physics degree online can offer in-depth technical skills valued across tech, research, and engineering roles. Whichever path you choose, online options provide flexibility—enabling you to balance studies, work, and life while advancing your career in technology.

Best Scientists Citing Kay Connelly

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles