World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
36
Citations
4906
World Ranking
9571
National Ranking
5063

Lauren M. Schaefer 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 Lauren M. Schaefer 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: 108 publications — 25th percentile

25% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Lauren M. Schaefer 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 Lauren M. Schaefer 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: 36 D-Index — 19th percentile

19% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Best Publications

  • Development and validation of the Sociocultural Attitudes Towards Appearance Questionnaire-4 (SATAQ-4).

    Lauren M. Schaefer;Natasha L. Burke;J. Kevin Thompson;Robert F. Dedrick

  • Appearance-related teasing, body dissatisfaction, and disordered eating: A meta-analysis.

    Jessie E. Menzel;Lauren M. Schaefer;Natasha L. Burke;Laura L. Mayhew

  • Development and validation of the sociocultural attitudes towards appearance questionnaire-4-revised (SATAQ-4R): DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF THE SOCIOCULTURAL ATTITUDES

    Lauren M. Schaefer;Jennifer A. Harriger;Leslie J. Heinberg;Taylor Soderberg

  • The development and validation of the Physical Appearance Comparison Scale-Revised (PACS-R)

    Lauren M. Schaefer;J. Kevin Thompson

  • Self-objectification and disordered eating: A meta-analysis.

    Lauren M. Schaefer;J. Kevin Thompson

  • Self-objectification, body shame, and disordered eating: Testing a core mediational model of objectification theory among White, Black, and Hispanic women.

    Lauren M. Schaefer;Natasha L. Burke;Rachel M. Calogero;Jessie E. Menzel

  • The role of affect in the maintenance of binge-eating disorder: Evidence from an ecological momentary assessment study.

    Lauren M. Schaefer;Kathryn E. Smith;Lisa M. Anderson;Li Cao

  • Where identities converge: The importance of intersectionality in eating disorders research.

    Natasha L Burke;Lauren M Schaefer;Vivienne M Hazzard;Rachel F Rodgers;Rachel F Rodgers

  • Adult and childhood weight influence body image and depression through weight stigmatization.

    Serena D Stevens;Sylvia Herbozo;Holly Er Morrell;Lauren M Schaefer

  • Identifying a male clinical cutoff on the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q).

    Lauren M. Schaefer;Kathryn E. Smith;Rachel Leonard;Chad Wetterneck

  • Socioeconomic status and eating disorder prevalence: at the intersections of gender identity, sexual orientation, and race/ethnicity

    Unknown

  • Internalization of Thin-Ideal and Muscular-Ideal

    Joel K. Thompson;Lauren M. Schaefer;Jessie E. Menzel

  • Demographic predictors of body image satisfaction: The U.S. Body Project I

    Unknown

  • Comparing internalization of appearance ideals and appearance-related pressures among women from the United States, Italy, England, and Australia.

    Lauren M. Schaefer;Natasha L. Burke;Lisa M. Anderson;J. Kevin Thompson

  • Aspects of self-concept and eating disorder recovery: What does the sense of self look like when an individual recovers from an eating disorder?

    Anna M. Bardone-Cone;Lauren M. Schaefer;Christine R. Maldonado;Ellen E. Fitzsimmons

  • Differential impact of upward and downward comparisons on diverse women's disordered eating behaviors and body image

    Diana Rancourt;Lauren M. Schaefer;Jennifer K. Bosson;J. Kevin Thompson

  • Does the Tripartite Influence Model of Body Image and Eating Pathology Function Similarly Across Racial/Ethnic Groups of White, Black, Latina, and Asian Women?

    Natasha L. Burke;Lauren M. Schaefer;Yvette G. Karvay;Anna M. Bardone-Cone

  • Pathways from sociocultural and objectification constructs to body satisfaction among women: The U.S. Body Project I

    Unknown

  • Examining intra-individual variability in food-related inhibitory control and negative affect as predictors of binge eating using ecological momentary assessment

    Kathryn E. Smith;Tyler B. Mason;Lauren M. Schaefer;Adrienne Juarascio

  • Testing the Tripartite Influence Model among heterosexual, bisexual, and lesbian women

    Vivienne M. Hazzard;Lauren M. Schaefer;Katherine Schaumberg;Anna M. Bardone-Cone

Frequent Co-Authors

J. Kevin Thompson
J. Kevin Thompson University of South Florida
Stephen A. Wonderlich
Stephen A. Wonderlich University of North Dakota
Ross D. Crosby
Ross D. Crosby University of North Dakota
Kathryn E. Smith
Kathryn E. Smith University of Southern California
Carol B. Peterson
Carol B. Peterson University of Minnesota
Scott J. Crow
Scott J. Crow University of Minnesota
Scott G. Engel
Scott G. Engel University of North Dakota
Rachel F. Rodgers
Rachel F. Rodgers Northeastern University
Anna M. Bardone-Cone
Anna M. Bardone-Cone University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Drew A. Anderson
Drew A. Anderson University at Albany, State University of New York

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:

Best Scientists Citing Lauren M. Schaefer

Recently Published Articles