World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
66
Citations
25568
World Ranking
2268
National Ranking
1133

Loren Terveen publications per year

1987: 1 publications 1988: 0 publications 1989: 0 publications 1990: 2 publications 1991: 3 publications 1992: 1 publications 1993: 5 publications 1994: 4 publications 1995: 8 publications 1996: 4 publications 1997: 9 publications 1998: 7 publications 1999: 4 publications 2000: 3 publications 2001: 2 publications 2002: 9 publications 2003: 6 publications 2004: 6 publications 2005: 10 publications 2006: 6 publications 2007: 9 publications 2008: 6 publications 2009: 4 publications 2010: 5 publications 2011: 10 publications 2012: 10 publications 2013: 12 publications 2014: 10 publications 2015: 11 publications 2016: 11 publications 2017: 13 publications 2018: 12 publications 2019: 3 publications 2020: 5 publications 2021: 8 publications 2022: 4 publications 2023: 2 publications 2024: 4 publications 2025: 3 publications 2026: 1 publications
1987 2026

233 publications in total across all disciplines

Loren Terveen publication distribution in Computer Science in 2027

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Computer Science in 2027. The highlighted bar marks where Loren Terveen 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: 217 publications — 52nd percentile

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

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

Loren Terveen D-index placement in Computer Science in 2027

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Computer Science scientists ranked by Research.com in 2027. The highlighted bar marks where Loren Terveen 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: 66 D-Index — 84th percentile

84% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2009 - ACM Distinguished Member

Overview

Loren Terveen is affiliated with the University of Minnesota in the United States, focusing on research that intersects social sciences and computer science. Their scholarly work spans several key areas including communication, artificial intelligence, sociology and political science, health, and social psychology.

The topics Loren frequently investigates cover a range of social and technological domains such as:

  • Wikis in Education and Collaboration
  • Social Media in Health Education
  • Social Media and Politics
  • Recommender Systems and Techniques
  • Mental Health via Writing
  • Open Source Software Innovations
  • Topic Modeling

A selection of recent papers authored or co-authored by Loren illustrates the diversity of their research interests:

  • "Blissfully Happy" or "Ready to Fight": Varying Interpretations of Emoji, 2021, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
  • What is Spiritual Support and How Might It Impact the Design of Online Communities?, 2021, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • Misalignment Between Supply and Demand of Quality Content in Peer Production Communities, 2021, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
  • Human-centered recommender systems: Origins, advances, challenges, and opportunities, 2021, AI Magazine
  • Effective Strategies for Crowd-Powered Cognitive Reappraisal Systems: A Field Deployment of the Flip*Doubt Web Application for Mental Health, 2021, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

Frequent publication venues for Loren include:

  • Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
  • Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • interactions
  • AI Magazine

Loren collaborates often with several co-authors, including:

  • Svetlana Yarosh
  • Mo Houtti
  • Zachary Levonian
  • Hannah Miller
  • Isaac Johnson

In recognition of their contributions to the computing field, Loren Terveen was named an ACM Distinguished Member in 2009.

Best Publications

  • Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems

    Jonathan L. Herlocker;Joseph A. Konstan;Loren G. Terveen;John T. Riedl

  • PHOAKS: a system for sharing recommendations

    Loren Terveen;Will Hill;Brian Amento;David McDonald

  • The dynamics of mass interaction

    Steve Whittaker;Loren Terveen;Will Hill;Lynn Cherny

  • Foundational Issues in Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science: Impasse and Solution

    Mark H. Bickhard;Loren Terveen

  • Exploring the filter bubble: the effect of using recommender systems on content diversity

    Tien T. Nguyen;Pik-Mai Hui;F. Maxwell Harper;Loren Terveen

  • Beyond Recommender Systems: Helping People Help Each Other

    Loren Terveen;Will Hill

  • Creating, destroying, and restoring value in wikipedia

    Reid Priedhorsky;Jilin Chen;Shyong (Tony) K. Lam;Katherine Panciera

  • “Blissfully Happy” or “Ready toFight”: Varying Interpretations of Emoji

    Hannah Jean Miller;Jacob Thebault-Spieker;Shuo Chang;Isaac L. Johnson

  • Social matching: A framework and research agenda

    Loren Terveen;David W. McDonald

  • SuggestBot: using intelligent task routing to help people find work in wikipedia

    Dan Cosley;Dan Frankowski;Loren Terveen;John Riedl

  • Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia

    Katherine Panciera;Aaron Halfaker;Loren Terveen

  • Does “authority” mean quality? predicting expert quality ratings of Web documents

    Brian Amento;Loren Terveen;Will Hill

  • Discovering personally meaningful places: An interactive clustering approach

    Changqing Zhou;Dan Frankowski;Pamela Ludford;Shashi Shekhar

  • Discovering personal gazetteers: an interactive clustering approach

    Changqing Zhou;Dan Frankowski;Pamela Ludford;Shashi Shekhar

  • Think different: increasing online community participation using uniqueness and group dissimilarity

    Pamela J. Ludford;Dan Cosley;Dan Frankowski;Loren Terveen

  • Overview of human-computer collaboration

    Loren G. Terveen

  • WWW 2014 - Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web

    Tien T. Nguyen;Pik Mai Hui;Max Harper;Loren G Terveen

  • Wireless myoelectric control apparatus and methods

    William Colyer Hill;Fernando Carlos Pereira;Yoram Singer;Loren Gilbert Terveen

  • Value-Sensitive Algorithm Design: Method, Case Study, and Lessons

    Haiyi Zhu;Bowen Yu;Aaron Halfaker;Loren Terveen

  • Let's stop pushing the envelope and start addressing it: a reference task agenda for HCI

    Steve Whittaker;Loren Terveen;Bonnie A. Nardi

  • Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work

    Amy Bruckman;Scott Counts;Cliff Lampe;Loren Terveen

  • Dynamics of mass interaction

    Steve Whittaker;Loren Terveen;Will Hill;Lynn Cherny

Frequent Co-Authors

Brent Hecht
Brent Hecht Northwestern University
Brian Amento
Brian Amento AT&T (United States)
John Riedl
John Riedl University of Minnesota
Joseph A. Konstan
Joseph A. Konstan University of Minnesota
Dan Cosley
Dan Cosley National Science Foundation
Steve Whittaker
Steve Whittaker University of California, Santa Cruz
Cliff Lampe
Cliff Lampe University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Shashi Shekhar
Shashi Shekhar University of Minnesota
Amy Bruckman
Amy Bruckman Georgia Institute of Technology
David W. McDonald
David W. McDonald University of Washington

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 wide array of online degree pathways and certifications. For those eager to start their tech careers quickly, pursuing associate's degree online programs can be an excellent starting point. These two-year programs focus on essential skills, enabling quicker entry into the job market.

If you seek to boost your credentials further, some of the easy certifications to get online provide specialized expertise in high-demand fields. These certifications are often affordable, flexible, and can rapidly enhance your employability and earning potential.

For professionals wanting to advance their knowledge efficiently, the shortest online masters degree programs allow students to obtain advanced qualifications on an accelerated timeline—sometimes in a year or less. Choosing among the most useful graduate degrees can ensure your investment leads to rewarding, in-demand job opportunities.

Each of these flexible online options makes it easier than ever to customize your path toward a successful career in computer science or related fields.

Best Scientists Citing Loren Terveen

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles