World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Meredyth Daneman

Meredyth Daneman

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
40
Citations
20687
World Ranking
8025
National Ranking
541

Meredyth Daneman 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 Meredyth Daneman 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: 85 publications — 11th percentile

11% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Meredyth Daneman 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 Meredyth Daneman 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: 40 D-Index — 30th percentile

30% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Meredyth Daneman is affiliated with the University of Toronto in Canada. Their academic profile is marked by a focus on research within their institutional setting, though specific details about main fields of study, subfields, or research topics are not available.

No records are provided concerning recent papers authored by Meredyth Daneman, including paper titles, publication years, or venues. Similarly, information about frequent co-authors, frequent publication venues, and book publications is not present in the data.

There is also no information regarding awards or recognitions received by Meredyth Daneman.

Overall, current data indicates the scientist maintains an active standing without publicly documented details on research output, collaborations, or specific areas of expertise at this time.

Best Publications

  • Individual differences in working memory and reading

    Meredyth Daneman;Patricia A. Carpenter

  • Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis.

    Meredyth Daneman;Philip M. Merikle

  • How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise

    M. Kathleen Pichora‐Fuller;Bruce A. Schneider;Meredyth Daneman

  • Individual Differences in Integrating Information between and within Sentences.

    Meredyth Daneman;Patricia A. Carpenter

  • Individual differences in comprehending and producing words in context

    Meredyth Daneman;Ian Green

  • Working memory and reading skill re-examined.

    Meredyth Daneman;Twila Tardif

  • A new tool for measuring and understanding individual differences in the component processes of reading comprehension

    Brenda Hannon;Meredyth Daneman

  • Listening in aging adults: from discourse comprehension to psychoacoustics.

    Bruce A. Schneider;Meredyth Daneman;M. Kathleen Pichora-Fuller

  • Working memory as a predictor of verbal fluency.

    Meredyth Daneman

  • Listening to discourse in distracting settings: the effects of aging.

    Bruce A. Schneider;Meredyth Daneman;Dana R. Murphy;Sheree Kwong See

  • Lexical retrieval and error recovery in reading: A model based on eye fixations

    Patricia A. Carpenter;Meredyth Daneman

  • Effects of Senescent Changes in Audition and Cognition on Spoken Language Comprehension

    Bruce A. Schneider;Kathy Pichora-Fuller;Meredyth Daneman

  • Speech comprehension difficulties in older adults: cognitive slowing or age-related changes in hearing?

    Bruce A. Schneider;Meredyth Daneman;Dana R. Murphy

  • Using working memory theory to investigate the construct validity of multiple-choice reading comprehension tests such as the SAT.

    Meredyth Daneman;Brenda Hannon

  • Does the information content of an irrelevant source differentially affect spoken word recognition in younger and older adults

    Liang Li;Meredyth Daneman;James G. Qi;Bruce A. Schneider

  • How competing speech interferes with speech comprehension in everyday listening situations.

    Bruce A. Schneider;Liang Li;Meredyth Daneman

  • Why do older adults have difficulty following conversations

    Dana R. Murphy;Meredyth Daneman;Bruce A. Schneider

  • Individual differences in reading skills.

    Meredyth Daneman

  • PSYCHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS OF UNCONSCIOUS PERCEPTION

    Philip M. Merikle;Meredyth Daneman

  • Effects of Aging and Noise on Real-Time Spoken Word Recognition: Evidence From Eye Movements

    Boaz M. Ben-David;Craig G. Chambers;Meredyth Daneman;M. Kathleen Pichora-Fuller

  • Working Memory and Language

    Meredyth Daneman

Frequent Co-Authors

Bruce A. Schneider
Bruce A. Schneider University of Toronto
Eyal M. Reingold
Eyal M. Reingold University of Toronto
Philip M. Merikle
Philip M. Merikle University of Waterloo
M. Kathleen Pichora-Fuller
M. Kathleen Pichora-Fuller University of Toronto
Patricia A. Carpenter
Patricia A. Carpenter Carnegie Mellon University
Twila Tardif
Twila Tardif University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Simon Garrod
Simon Garrod University of Glasgow

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 psychology opens doors to a variety of rewarding online degree options and diverse career paths. For those interested in clinical work, clinical psychology masters programs online offer the foundational skills needed to work with individuals and groups in both therapeutic and healthcare environments.

If you’re aiming for research, teaching, or leadership roles, consider one of the best online psychology PhD programs, which can deepen your expertise and expand career prospects. Those looking for flexibility might pursue a master's in psychology online accredited program, allowing you to balance work, study, and personal commitments while earning a respected qualification.

Another in-demand pathway is behavior analysis. ABA online masters programs prepare graduates to support individuals with behavioral challenges and are valued in schools, clinics, and community settings.

With flexible online formats, each of these programs can help you advance your career or specialize in an area that matches your goals, whether you’re just starting out or looking to upskill.

Best Scientists Citing Meredyth Daneman

Recently Published Articles