World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Social Sciences and Humanities

D-Index
47
Citations
12293
World Ranking
3325
National Ranking
1606

Mark W. Fraser publication distribution in Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Mark W. Fraser sits on this spectrum.

44–53 publications: 28 scientists 54–63 publications: 61 scientists 64–73 publications: 161 scientists 74–83 publications: 225 scientists 84–93 publications: 301 scientists 94–103 publications: 390 scientists 104–113 publications: 406 scientists 114–123 publications: 474 scientists 124–133 publications: 453 scientists 134–143 publications: 434 scientists 144–153 publications: 407 scientists 154–163 publications: 411 scientists 164–173 publications: 391 scientists 174–183 publications: 313 scientists 184–193 publications: 319 scientists 194–203 publications: 304 scientists 204–213 publications: 285 scientists 214–223 publications: 246 scientists 224–233 publications: 213 scientists 234–243 publications: 170 scientists 244–253 publications: 167 scientists 254–263 publications: 162 scientists 264–273 publications: 138 scientists 274–283 publications: 138 scientists 284–293 publications: 113 scientists 294–303 publications: 106 scientists 304–313 publications: 95 scientists 314–323 publications: 101 scientists 324–333 publications: 81 scientists 334–343 publications: 69 scientists 344–353 publications: 56 scientists 354–363 publications: 36 scientists 364–373 publications: 42 scientists 374–383 publications: 41 scientists 384–393 publications: 44 scientists 394–403 publications: 27 scientists 404–413 publications: 30 scientists 414–423 publications: 20 scientists 424–433 publications: 29 scientists 434–443 publications: 29 scientists 444–453 publications: 25 scientists 454–463 publications: 19 scientists 464–473 publications: 21 scientists 474–483 publications: 11 scientists 484–493 publications: 17 scientists 494–503 publications: 7 scientists 504–513 publications: 6 scientists 514–523 publications: 12 scientists 524–533 publications: 10 scientists 534–543 publications: 7 scientists 544–553 publications: 6 scientists 554–563 publications: 12 scientists 564–569 publications: 8 scientists 570+ publications: 100 scientists
44 publications 570+

This scientist: 137 publications — 34th percentile

34% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 570 publications or more.

Mark W. Fraser D-index placement in Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Mark W. Fraser sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 177 scientists 31 D-Index: 210 scientists 32 D-Index: 222 scientists 33 D-Index: 188 scientists 34 D-Index: 181 scientists 35 D-Index: 243 scientists 36 D-Index: 261 scientists 37 D-Index: 272 scientists 38 D-Index: 278 scientists 39 D-Index: 300 scientists 40 D-Index: 297 scientists 41 D-Index: 308 scientists 42 D-Index: 313 scientists 43 D-Index: 300 scientists 44 D-Index: 269 scientists 45 D-Index: 260 scientists 46 D-Index: 228 scientists 47 D-Index: 251 scientists 48 D-Index: 203 scientists 49 D-Index: 186 scientists 50 D-Index: 187 scientists 51 D-Index: 166 scientists 52 D-Index: 138 scientists 53 D-Index: 141 scientists 54 D-Index: 131 scientists 55 D-Index: 137 scientists 56 D-Index: 109 scientists 57 D-Index: 129 scientists 58 D-Index: 95 scientists 59 D-Index: 105 scientists 60 D-Index: 106 scientists 61 D-Index: 86 scientists 62 D-Index: 94 scientists 63 D-Index: 77 scientists 64 D-Index: 79 scientists 65 D-Index: 59 scientists 66 D-Index: 68 scientists 67 D-Index: 51 scientists 68 D-Index: 49 scientists 69 D-Index: 40 scientists 70 D-Index: 43 scientists 71 D-Index: 40 scientists 72 D-Index: 50 scientists 73 D-Index: 46 scientists 74 D-Index: 43 scientists 75 D-Index: 45 scientists 76 D-Index: 45 scientists 77 D-Index: 30 scientists 78 D-Index: 25 scientists 79 D-Index: 31 scientists 80 D-Index: 29 scientists 81 D-Index: 18 scientists 82 D-Index: 21 scientists 83 D-Index: 26 scientists 84 D-Index: 15 scientists 85 D-Index: 15 scientists 86 D-Index: 19 scientists 87 D-Index: 19 scientists 88 D-Index: 12 scientists 89 D-Index: 7 scientists 90 D-Index: 19 scientists 91 D-Index: 20 scientists 92 D-Index: 13 scientists 93 D-Index: 9 scientists 94 D-Index: 13 scientists 95 D-Index: 8 scientists 96 D-Index: 7 scientists 97 D-Index: 6 scientists 98 D-Index: 6 scientists 99 D-Index: 6 scientists 100+ D-Index: 97 scientists
30 D-Index 100+

This scientist: 47 D-Index — 59th percentile

59% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 100 D-Index or more.

Overview

Mark W. Fraser is affiliated with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in the United States. Their research spans several intersecting fields within the broad domain of Social Sciences, with a focus on Education, Clinical Psychology, General Health Professions, Social Psychology, and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health.

Fraser's work prominently addresses topics such as Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development, Child Development and Digital Technology, Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression, Advanced Causal Inference Techniques, Psychometric Methodologies and Testing, School Choice and Performance, and Autism Spectrum Disorder Research.

Their recent scholarly publications include:

  • Propensity Score Analysis: Recent Debate and Discussion, 2020, Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research
  • Strengthening the Social Information Processing Skills of Third Graders in Rural China, 2020, Research on Social Work Practice
  • Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Interventions to Improve Children's Social Information-Processing Skills, 2023, Research on Social Work Practice
  • Welfare Participation and Depression Symptoms Among Youth in China, 2020, Global Social Welfare
  • Using a Modified Surprise Question as a Tool to Improve Primary Palliative Care in a Neurocritical Care Unit, 2020, The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety

Frequent coauthors collaborating with Fraser include:

  • Shenyang Guo
  • Peng Jin
  • Xiaodong Sun
  • Shiyou Wu
  • Mimi V. Chapman

Fraser's contributions have appeared repeatedly in venues such as:

  • UNC Libraries
  • Research on Social Work Practice
  • Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research
  • Global Social Welfare
  • The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety

Best Publications

  • Propensity Score Analysis: Statistical Methods and Applications

    Shenyang Guo;Mark W. Fraser

  • Risk, Protection, and Resilience: Toward a Conceptual Framework for Social Work Practice.

    Mark W. Fraser;Jack M. Richman;Maeda J. Galinsky

  • Risk and resilience in childhood

    M. W. Fraser;L. D. Kirby;P. R. Smokowski

  • Risk and Resilience in Childhood: An Ecological Perspective

    Mark W. Fraser

  • The effectiveness of school-based bullying prevention programs: A systematic review

    Caroline B.R. Evans;Mark W. Fraser;Katie L. Cotter

  • Intervention Research: Developing Social Programs

    Mark W. Fraser

  • Steps in Intervention Research: Designing and Developing Social Programs

    Mark W. Fraser;Maeda J. Galinsky

  • Aggressive Behavior in Childhood and Early Adolescence: An Ecological-Developmental Perspective on Youth Violence

    Mark W. Fraser

  • Social policy for children and families : a risk and resilience perspective

    Jeffrey M. Jenson;Mark W. Fraser

  • Social information-processing skills training to promote social competence and prevent aggressive behavior in the third grades.

    Mark W. Fraser;Maeda J. Galinsky;Paul R. Smokowski;Steven H. Day

  • Families in Crisis: The Impact of Intensive Family Preservation Services

    Mark W. Fraser;Peter J. Pecora;David Haapala

  • Effectiveness of family preservation services

    Mark W. Fraser;Kristine E. Nelson;Jeanne C. Rivard

  • School shootings: Making sense of the senseless

    Traci L. Wike;Mark W. Fraser

  • An experiment in family reunification: Correlates of outcomes at one-year follow-up

    Mark W. Fraser;Elaine Walton;Robert E. Lewis;Peter J. Pecora

  • A Risk and Resilience Framework for Child, Youth, and Family Policy

    Jeffrey M. Jenson;Mark W. Fraser

  • Classifying Juvenile Offenders According to Risk of Recidivism: Predictive Validity, Race/Ethnicity, and Gender

    Craig S. Schwalbe;Mark W. Fraser;Steven H. Day;Valerie Cooley

  • Childhood risk and protective factors and late adolescent adjustment in inner city minority youth

    Paul R. Smokowski;Emily A. Mann;Arthur J. Reynolds;Mark W. Fraser

  • In-home family-focused reunification: an experimental study

    E. Walton;Mark W. Fraser;R. E. Lewis;P. J. Pecora

  • Peer Relations of Bullies, Bully-Victims, and Victims: The Two Social Worlds of Bullying in Second-Grade Classrooms

    Thomas W. Farmer;Robert A. Petrin;Dylan L. Robertson;Mark W. Fraser

  • Event history analysis:A proportional hazards perspective on modeling outcomes in intensive family preservation services

    Mark W. Fraser;Peter J. Pecora;Chirapat Popuang;David A. Haapala

  • Intervention research: Deveoping social programs

    Mark W. Fraser;Jack M. Richman;Maeda J. Galinsky;Steven H. Day

Frequent Co-Authors

Peter J. Pecora
Peter J. Pecora University of Washington
J. David Hawkins
J. David Hawkins University of Washington
Richard P. Barth
Richard P. Barth University of Maryland, Baltimore
Laurel K. Leslie
Laurel K. Leslie Tufts University
Enola K. Proctor
Enola K. Proctor Washington University in St. Louis
John S. Brekke
John S. Brekke University of Southern California
Richard F. Catalano
Richard F. Catalano University of Washington
Deborah Gorman-Smith
Deborah Gorman-Smith University of Chicago
Mary Jane Rotheram-Borus
Mary Jane Rotheram-Borus University of California, Los Angeles
Kevin P. Haggerty
Kevin P. Haggerty 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 a degree in the Social Sciences and Humanities opens up diverse career opportunities, especially with the rise of flexible online learning. Many students now opt for online msw programs to pursue social work, which offers both affordability and the convenience of remote study. Increasingly, universities are also providing accelerated msw programs online that allow individuals to earn their qualifications faster, adapting to fast-paced career goals.

For those interested in behavioral analysis, bcba certification programs prepare graduates for specialized roles working with individuals with behavioral or developmental challenges. Similarly, pursuing a accelerated psychology bachelor's degree can set the foundation for a wide range of careers in mental health, counseling, and research.

Choosing the right online degree program is essential for aligning your studies with your career ambitions. Whether you're drawn to social work, psychology, or behavioral analysis, these flexible pathways make quality education more accessible than ever and can help you reach your professional goals efficiently.

Best Scientists Citing Mark W. Fraser

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles