World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
51
Citations
16274
World Ranking
5118
National Ranking
2819

Michael T. Brannick 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 Michael T. Brannick 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: 117 publications — 30th percentile

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

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

Michael T. Brannick 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 Michael T. Brannick 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: 51 D-Index — 56th percentile

56% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Michael T. Brannick is affiliated with the University of South Florida in the United States. Their research encompasses multiple areas within medicine, with a notable focus on simulation-based education in healthcare and meta-analysis methods.

The scientist has contributed to numerous recent publications, including:

  • Recommendations for Reviewing Meta-Analyses in Organizational Research (2020, Organizational Research Methods)
  • Capturing Resilience in Context: Development and Validation of a Situational Judgment Test of Resilience (2020, Human Performance)
  • Advanced Trauma Life Support Course Delivery: Comparison of Outcomes From Modifications During Covid-19 (2021, Cureus)
  • Capturing the underlying distribution in meta-analysis: Credibility and tolerance intervals (2021, Research Synthesis Methods)
  • Conflict Behaviors Mediate Effects of Manipulated Leader-Member Exchange on Team-Oriented Outcomes (2021, Journal of Business and Psychology)

The scientist frequently collaborates with a number of coauthors, including:

  • Luis Llerena
  • Shannon K. T. Bailey
  • Colleen C. Reiner
  • Lauren Dyer
  • Yasuharu Okuda

Michael T. Brannick has published in a variety of venues, most notably:

  • Organizational Research Methods
  • Cureus
  • Human Performance
  • Medical Teacher
  • Research Synthesis Methods

Their main fields of study span medicine with subfields including physiology, statistics, probability and uncertainty, emergency medicine, surgery, and clinical psychology. These fields reflect a broad medical and health-related research focus.

Key topics in their work include:

  • Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
  • Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Surgical Simulation and Training
  • Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
  • Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance
  • Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
  • Resilience and Mental Health

Best Publications

  • Construction of a Job in General scale: A comparison of global, composite, and specific measures.

    G. H. Ironson;P. C. Smith;M. T. Brannick;W. M. Gibson

  • Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: guidelines, issues, and alternatives

    Amy E. Hurley;Terri A. Scandura;Chester A. Schriesheim;Michael T. Brannick

  • Methodological urban legends: The misuse of statistical control variables

    Paul E. Spector;Michael T. Brannick

  • The Influence of Sociocultural Factors on Body Image: A Meta‐Analysis

    Guy Cafri;Yuko Yamamiya;Michael Brannick;J. Kevin Thompson

  • Sleep, Cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Omonigho M Bubu;Michael Brannick;James Mortimer;Ogie Umasabor-Bubu

  • A Meta-Analytic Investigation of Job Applicant Faking on Personality Measures

    Scott A. Birkeland;Todd M. Manson;Jennifer L. Kisamore;Michael T. Brannick

  • Publication Bias in Psychological Science: Prevalence, Methods for Identifying and Controlling, and Implications for the Use of Meta-Analyses

    Christopher J. Ferguson;Michael T. Brannick

  • Motive, role identity, and prosocial personality as predictors of volunteer activity

    Marcia A. Finkelstein;Louis A. Penner;Michael T. Brannick

  • Critical comments on applying covariance structure modeling

    Michael T. Brannick

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

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

  • Job and work analysis : methods, research, and applications for human resource management

    Michael T. Brannick;Edward L. Levine;Frederick P. Morgeson

  • A systematic review of the reliability of objective structured clinical examination scores.

    Michael T Brannick;H Tugba Erol-Korkmaz;Matthew Prewett

  • Real-time human perceptions: toward a bicycle level of service

    Bruce W. Landis;Venkat R. Vattikuti;Michael T. Brannick

  • What Is Method Variance and How Can We Cope With It? A Panel Discussion

    Michael T. Brannick;David Chan;James M. Conway;Charles E. Lance

  • When Two Factors Don’t Reflect Two Constructs: How Item Characteristics Can Produce Artifactual Factors

    Paul E. Spector;Paul T. Van Katwyk;Michael T. Brannick;Peter Y. Chen

  • The Nature and Effects of Method Variance in Organizational Research

    Paul E. Spector;Michael T. Brannick

  • Is social network site usage related to depression? A meta-analysis of Facebook-depression relations.

    Sunkyung Yoon;Mary Kleinman;Jessica Mertz;Michael Brannick

  • To Transfer or Not to Transfer? Investigating the Combined Effects of Trainee Characteristics, Team Leader Support, and Team Climate

    Kimberly A. Smith-Jentsch;Eduardo Salas;Michael T. Brannick

  • Development and validation of the Physical Appearance State and Trait Anxiety Scale (PASTAS)

    David L. Reed;J.Kevin Thompson;Michael T. Brannick;William P. Sacco

  • Empirical modeling of an alcohol expectancy memory network using multidimensional scaling.

    Bruce C. Rather;Mark S. Goldman;Laurie Roehrich;Michael T. Brannick

  • Team Performance Assessment and Measurement: Theory, Methods, and Applications. Series in Applied Psychology.

    Michael T. Brannick;Eduardo Salas;Carolyn Prince

Frequent Co-Authors

Eduardo Salas
Eduardo Salas Rice University
Paul E. Spector
Paul E. Spector University of South Florida
Frederick P. Morgeson
Frederick P. Morgeson Michigan State University
J. Kevin Thompson
J. Kevin Thompson University of South Florida
Kenneth I. Pargament
Kenneth I. Pargament Bowling Green State University
Larry J. Williams
Larry J. Williams Texas Tech University
Terri A. Scandura
Terri A. Scandura University of Miami
Robert J. Vandenberg
Robert J. Vandenberg University of Georgia
Louis A. Penner
Louis A. Penner Wayne State University
Christopher J. Ferguson
Christopher J. Ferguson Stetson University

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 Psychology degree in the USA opens doors to diverse career pathways, with substance abuse counseling standing out as a critical and in-demand field. Online psychology and counseling degrees make it possible for students nationwide to prepare for rewarding careers helping individuals overcome addiction and substance use disorders.

If you’re interested in becoming a substance abuse counselor, requirements can vary by location. For example, review the steps for becoming a substance abuse counselor in Arlington and see how they differ from the Atlanta substance abuse counselor certification requirements. Similarly, the Aurora substance abuse counselor certification requirements and guidelines for becoming a substance abuse counselor in Austin reflect specific state standards.

Aspiring counselors should plan to complete relevant online degrees, supervised fieldwork, and meet local certification or licensure criteria. Learning about these pathways now can help you take the next step toward a fulfilling role in behavioral health and addiction recovery.

Best Scientists Citing Michael T. Brannick

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles