World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Kees van den Bos

Kees van den Bos

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
49
Citations
9737
World Ranking
5673
National Ranking
267

Kees van den Bos 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 Kees van den Bos 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: 156 publications — 52nd percentile

52% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Kees van den Bos 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 Kees van den Bos 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: 49 D-Index — 52nd percentile

52% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Kees van den Bos is an academic affiliated with Utrecht University in the Netherlands. Their research predominantly spans the social sciences and psychology, with an emphasis on understanding social, psychological, and legal phenomena through interdisciplinary approaches.

The main fields of study explored by van den Bos include:

  • Social Sciences
  • Psychology

Within these broader fields, their work covers several subfields such as:

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Social Psychology
  • Law
  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Clinical Psychology

Van den Bos's research topics reflect diverse interests, including:

  • Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Cultural Differences and Values
  • Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
  • Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
  • Jury Decision Making Processes
  • Personality Traits and Psychology

They have contributed to publication venues with a notable frequency in:

  • Frontiers in Psychology
  • Journal of Applied Social Psychology
  • Social Justice Research
  • Personality and Individual Differences
  • Law & Society Review

Van den Bos has authored and co-authored several papers reflecting the breadth of their research interests. Some recent publications include:

  • Country-level correlates of the Dark Triad traits in 49 countries (2020, Journal of Personality)
  • Structure of Dark Triad Dirty Dozen Across Eight World Regions (2020, Assessment)
  • Religious radicalization: social appraisals and finding radical redemption in extreme beliefs (2020, Current Opinion in Psychology)
  • Intolerance of uncertainty, future time perspective, and self-control (2021, Personality and Individual Differences)
  • Speaking of Justice: A Qualitative Interview Study on Perceived Procedural Justice Among Defendants in Dutch Criminal Cases (2020, Law & Society Review)

Frequent collaborators include:

  • Beatrice de Graaf
  • Lisa F. M. Ansems
  • Alain Van Hiel
  • Qing Yang
  • Amarins Jansma

In the area of book publications, van den Bos has published with Cambridge University Press, notably the title The Fair Process Effect (2023).

Best Publications

  • When fairness works : Toward a general theory of uncertainty management

    E.Allan Lind;Kees van den Bos

  • Making Sense of Life: The Existential Self Trying to Deal with Personal Uncertainty

    Kees van den Bos

  • Determinants of radicalization of Islamic youth in the Netherlands: personal uncertainty, perceived injustice, and perceived group threat

    Bertjan Doosje;Annemarie Loseman;Kees van den Bos

  • On the subjective quality of social justice: The role of affect as information in the psychology of justice judgments

    Kees van den Bos

  • The inaction effect in the psychology of regret

    Marcel Zeelenberg;Kees van den Bos;Eric van Dijk;Rik Pieters

  • An enquiry concerning the principles of cultural norms and values: The impact of uncertainty and mortality salience on reactions to violations and bolstering of cultural worldviews

    Kees van den Bos;P. Marijn Poortvliet;Marjolein Maas;Joost Miedema

  • Combined effects of uncertainty and organizational justice on employee health: testing the uncertainty management model of fairness judgments among Finnish public sector employees.

    Marko Elovainio;Kees van den Bos;Anne Linna;Mika Kivimäki;Mika Kivimäki

  • What are we talking about when we talk about no-voice procedures? On the psychology of the fair outcome effect

    Kees van den Bos

  • Uncertainty and the Roots of Extremism

    Michael A. Hogg;Arie Kruglanski;Kees van den Bos

  • The consistency rule and the voice effect : The influence of expectations on procedural fairness judgements and performance

    Kees Van Den Bos;Riël Vermunt;Henk A. M. Wilke

  • The Psychology of Own Versus Others’ Treatment: Self-Oriented and Other-Oriented Effects on Perceptions of Procedural Justice

    Kees van den Bos;E. Allan Lind

  • Procedural justice and status: status salience as antecedent of procedural fairness effects.

    Jan-Willem van Prooijen;Kees van den Bos;Henk A. M. Wilke

  • Group belongingness and procedural justice: social inclusion and exclusion by peers affects the psychology of voice.

    Jan-Willem van Prooijen;Kees van den Bos;Henk A. M. Wilke

  • Effects of organizational justice on depressive symptoms and sickness absence: a longitudinal perspective.

    Jan F. Ybema;Kees van den Bos

  • On preferences and doing the right thing: Satisfaction with advantageous inequity when cognitive processing is limited

    Kees van den Bos;Susanne L. Peters;D. Ramona Bobocel;Jan Fekke Ybema

  • Morality in Groups: On the Social‐Regulatory Functions of Right and Wrong

    Naomi Ellemers;Kees van den Bos

  • The influence of interdependent self-construal on procedural fairness effects

    Joel Brockner;David De Cremer;Kees van den Bos;Ya-Ru Chen

  • High procedural fairness heightens the effect of outcome favorability on self-evaluations : An attributional analysis

    Joel Brockner;Larry Heuer;Nace Magner;Robert Folger

  • “My In-group is Superior!”: Susceptibility for Radical Right-wing Attitudes and Behaviors in Dutch Youth

    Bertjan Doosje;Kees van den Bos;Annemarie Loseman;Allard R. Feddes

  • On the Psychology of the Belief in a Just World: Exploring Experiential and Rationalistic Paths to Victim Blaming

    Kees van den Bos;Marjolein Maas

  • We Blame Innocent Victims More Than I Do: Self-Construal Level Moderates Responses to Just-World Threats:

    Jan-Willem van Prooijen;Kees van den Bos

  • What Is Responsible for the Fair Process Effect

    Jerald Greenberg;Jason A. Colquitt

Frequent Co-Authors

E. Allan Lind
E. Allan Lind Duke University
Jan-Willem van Prooijen
Jan-Willem van Prooijen Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Joel Brockner
Joel Brockner Columbia University
Henk A. M. Wilke
Henk A. M. Wilke Leiden University
Eric van Dijk
Eric van Dijk Leiden University
Herbert Bless
Herbert Bless University of Mannheim
Alain Van Hiel
Alain Van Hiel Ghent University
Beate Seibt
Beate Seibt University of Oslo
David De Cremer
David De Cremer National University of Singapore
Rachel M. Calogero
Rachel M. Calogero University of Western Ontario

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 a degree in psychology can open doors to a variety of rewarding career pathways. Many students are drawn to counseling and therapy roles, including becoming a Marriage and Family Therapist (MFT). Online psychology degrees often include specializations or graduate tracks that lead to MFT licensure, which has specific requirements depending on your location.

If you are interested in how to become an MFT in Kansas City, you will need to understand both education prerequisites and supervised clinical experience requirements. In Texas, those looking into Laredo MFT education requirements should be aware of unique state and regional guidelines. For those considering Nevada, learning how to become an MFT in Las Vegas can help you navigate local licensure rules and opportunities. Meanwhile, Lexington MFT certification requirements highlight the importance of understanding specific documentation and exam processes in Kentucky.

Wherever you choose to study, online programs may offer flexibility but must be accredited and aligned with state standards. Research thoroughly and plan your educational pathway early for a successful psychology career.

Best Scientists Citing Kees van den Bos

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles