World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Psychology 33 10326 9665 5416 4944 111 13469

Nathan R. Kuncel publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Nathan R. Kuncel between 1998 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Nathan R. Kuncel published across 28 years, from 1998 to 2025, averaging 5 papers a year. Output peaked at 17 publications in 2007. 8 of the 140 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1998 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 17. Peak 17 publications in 2007. 1998: 2 publications 1999: 0 publications 2000: 0 publications 2001: 2 publications 2002: 1 publication 2003: 1 publication 2004: 3 publications 2005: 7 publications 2006: 3 publications 2007: 17 publications 2008: 4 publications 2009: 7 publications 2010: 5 publications 2011: 5 publications 2012: 8 publications 2013: 17 publications 2014: 7 publications 2015: 4 publications 2016: 7 publications 2017: 5 publications 2018: 5 publications 2019: 3 publications 2020: 7 publications 2021: 4 publications 2022: 5 publications 2023: 3 publications 2024: 4 publications 2025: 4 publications
1998 2025

140 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Nathan R. Kuncel: publications per year, 1998 to 2025
Year Publications
1998 2
1999 0
2000 0
2001 2
2002 1
2003 1
2004 3
2005 7
2006 3
2007 17
2008 4
2009 7
2010 5
2011 5
2012 8
2013 17
2014 7
2015 4
2016 7
2017 5
2018 5
2019 3
2020 7
2021 4
2022 5
2023 3
2024 4
2025 4
Total 140
Download as CSV

Nathan R. Kuncel 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 Nathan R. Kuncel sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 69 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 31–40 to 705+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 736. Most scientists, 736, have 101–110 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 111–120 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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
31–40 publications 705+

This scientist: 111 publications — 27th percentile

27% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
31–40 6
41–50 52
51–60 138
61–70 299
71–80 461
81–90 605
91–100 713
101–110 736
111–120 686 111
121–130 670
131–140 644
141–150 597
151–160 576
161–170 477
171–180 450
181–190 397
191–200 343
201–210 328
211–220 313
221–230 283
231–240 226
241–250 196
251–260 201
261–270 171
271–280 151
281–290 139
291–300 113
301–310 102
311–320 100
321–330 76
331–340 92
341–350 85
351–360 69
361–370 71
371–380 63
381–390 58
391–400 57
401–410 43
411–420 33
421–430 50
431–440 41
441–450 32
451–460 27
461–470 28
471–480 25
481–490 28
491–500 20
501–510 23
511–520 26
521–530 17
531–540 21
541–550 14
551–560 16
561–570 10
571–580 22
581–590 9
591–600 14
601–610 9
611–620 11
621–630 4
631–640 7
641–650 5
651–660 10
661–670 8
671–680 8
681–690 4
691–700 3
701–704 4
705+ 100
Download as CSV

Nathan R. Kuncel 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 Nathan R. Kuncel sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 58 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 144+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 702. Most scientists, 702, have 32–33 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 32–33 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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
30–31 D-Index 144+

This scientist: 33 D-Index — 10th percentile

10% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 398
32–33 702 33
34–35 671
36–37 659
38–39 641
40–41 671
42–43 617
44–45 558
46–47 495
48–49 487
50–51 445
52–53 390
54–55 408
56–57 345
58–59 325
60–61 321
62–63 248
64–65 290
66–67 218
68–69 219
70–71 215
72–73 183
74–75 169
76–77 132
78–79 137
80–81 120
82–83 112
84–85 86
86–87 101
88–89 83
90–91 77
92–93 70
94–95 78
96–97 58
98–99 53
100–101 57
102–103 48
104–105 53
106–107 46
108–109 24
110–111 35
112–113 27
114–115 32
116–117 31
118–119 22
120–121 16
122–123 24
124–125 18
126–127 11
128–129 19
130–131 10
132–133 16
134–135 10
136–137 12
138–139 8
140–141 5
142–143 12
144+ 98
Download as CSV

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2015 - Fellow of the American Psychological Association (APA)

Overview

Nathan R. Kuncel is affiliated with the University of Minnesota in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on topics within social sciences and psychology, with notable contributions in the study of decision-making, career development, and educational outcomes.

Their scholarly output includes work across several subfields such as safety research, public health, education, experimental and cognitive psychology, and management science. The specific research topics covered include decision-making and behavioral economics, career development and diversity, medical education and admissions, higher education studies, education and giftedness, personality traits, and psychometric methodologies.

Recent publications by Nathan R. Kuncel demonstrate a breadth of inquiry into academic and professional performance, psychological measurement, and gender disparities in STEM fields. These papers include:

  • Personality, attitude, and demographic correlates of academic dishonesty: A meta-analysis (2020) published in Psychological Bulletin
  • Pushing the Limits for Judgmental Consistency: Comparing Random Weighting Schemes with Expert Judgments (2020) in Personnel Assessment and Decisions
  • Why women STEM majors are less likely than men to persist in completing a STEM degree: More than the individual (2022) appearing in Personality and Individual Differences
  • The process of attrition in pre-medical studies: A large-scale analysis across 102 schools (2020) featured in PLoS ONE
  • A contemporary look at the relationship between general cognitive ability and job performance (2023) from the Journal of Applied Psychology

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Nathan R. Kuncel include:

  • Paul R. Sackett
  • Samuel David Lee
  • Martin C. Yu
  • Jeffrey A. Dahlke
  • Charlene Zhang

Nathan R. Kuncel has published articles in several academic venues multiple times. Notable journals where they frequently publish are:

  • Applied Measurement in Education
  • Personnel Assessment and Decisions
  • Personality and Individual Differences
  • Journal of Applied Psychology
  • Perspectives on Psychological Science

In 2015, Nathan R. Kuncel was recognized as a Fellow of the American Psychological Association (APA).

Best Publications

  • The Power of Personality: The Comparative Validity of Personality Traits, Socioeconomic Status, and Cognitive Ability for Predicting Important Life Outcomes:

    Brent W. Roberts;Nathan R. Kuncel;Rebecca Shiner;Avshalom Caspi

  • The Validity of Self-Reported Grade Point Averages, Class Ranks, and Test Scores: A Meta-Analysis and Review of the Literature

    Nathan R. Kuncel;Marcus Credé;Lisa L. Thomas

  • Academic Performance, Career Potential, Creativity, and Job Performance: Can One Construct Predict Them All?

    Nathan R. Kuncel;Sarah A. Hezlett;Deniz S. Ones

  • Study Habits, Skills, and Attitudes: The Third Pillar Supporting Collegiate Academic Performance

    Marcus Credé;Nathan R. Kuncel

  • A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the Graduate Record examinations : Implications for Graduate student selection and performance

    Nathan R. Kuncel;Sarah A. Hezlett;Deniz S. Ones

  • Standardized Tests Predict Graduate Students' Success

    Nathan R. Kuncel;Sarah A. Hezlett

  • Does College Teach Critical Thinking? A Meta-Analysis

    Christopher R. Huber;Nathan R. Kuncel

  • The relation between parents' involvement in children's schooling and children's adjustment: A meta-analysis.

    Michael M. Barger;Elizabeth Moorman Kim;Nathan R. Kuncel;Eva M. Pomerantz

  • Does socioeconomic status explain the relationship between admissions tests and post-secondary academic performance?

    Paul R. Sackett;Nathan R. Kuncel;Justin J. Arneson;Sara R. Cooper

  • Mechanical versus clinical data combination in selection and admissions decisions: a meta-analysis.

    Nathan R. Kuncel;David M. Klieger;Brian S. Connelly;Deniz S. Ones

  • Individual differences and their measurement : a review of 100 years of research

    Paul R. Sackett;Filip Lievens;Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Nathan R. Kuncel

  • Individual and team training.

    John P. Campbell;Nathan R. Kuncel

  • Fact and Fiction in Cognitive Ability Testing for Admissions and Hiring Decisions

    Nathan R. Kuncel;Sarah A. Hezlett

  • A Meta-Analysis of the Predictive Validity of the Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT) and Undergraduate Grade Point Average (UGPA) for Graduate Student Academic Performance.

    Nathan R. Kuncel;Marcus Credé;Lisa L. Thomas

  • A CONCEPTUAL AND EMPIRICAL REEXAMINATION OF THE MEASUREMENT OF THE SOCIAL DESIRABILITY OF ITEMS: IMPLICATIONS FOR DETECTING DESIRABLE RESPONSE STYLE AND SCALE DEVELOPMENT

    Nathan R Kuncel;Auke Tellegen

  • Individual differences as predictors of work, educational, and broad life outcomes

    Nathan R. Kuncel;Deniz S. Ones;Paul R. Sackett

  • The Validity of the Graduate Record Examination for Master’s and Doctoral Programs: A Meta-Analytic Investigation

    Nathan R. Kuncel;Serena Wee;Lauren Serafin;Sarah A. Hezlett

  • A Meta-Analysis of the Validity of the Pharmacy College Admission Test (PCAT) and Grade Predictors of Pharmacy Student Performance

    Nathan R. Kuncel;Marcus Credé;Lisa L. Thomas;David M. Klieger

  • Integrating personality and intelligence: Typical intellectual engagement and need for cognition

    Sang Eun Woo;Peter D. Harms;Nathan R. Kuncel

  • Personality, attitude, and demographic correlates of academic dishonesty: A meta-analysis.

    Samuel D. Lee;Nathan R. Kuncel;Jacob Gau

  • Toward a New Method of Detecting Deliberately Faked Personality Tests: The use of idiosyncratic item responses

    Nathan R. Kuncel;Matthew J. Borneman

Frequent Co-Authors

Paul R. Sackett
Paul R. Sackett University of Minnesota
Marcus Credé
Marcus Credé Iowa State University
Deniz S. Ones
Deniz S. Ones University of Minnesota
Lewis R. Goldberg
Lewis R. Goldberg Oregon Research Institute
Auke Tellegen
Auke Tellegen University of Minnesota
Brent W. Roberts
Brent W. Roberts University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Avshalom Caspi
Avshalom Caspi Duke University
Peter D. Harms
Peter D. Harms University of Alabama
Chad H. Van Iddekinge
Chad H. Van Iddekinge Florida State University
Filip Lievens
Filip Lievens Singapore Management 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 online degrees in psychology opens the door to a diverse range of career pathways, including roles in mental health, counseling, and behavioral analysis. One increasingly popular option is becoming a Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA), which offers both flexibility and fulfillment in working with individuals who have behavioral or developmental challenges.

To pursue a BCBA career, understanding regional certification and education requirements is essential. For example, San Francisco bcba education requirements outline specific steps for local licensure. Likewise, San Jose bcba education requirements detail prerequisites and fieldwork hours needed in that area.

Prospective students can also compare different pathways across the country. If you’re considering working in California, the bcba certification requirements in Santa Ana provide useful insights into additional regional expectations. Outside of California, those looking at opportunities in Arizona should review the bcba certification requirements in Scottsdale to understand alternative training standards. Each location may have unique requirements, so researching your chosen area is crucial for planning your career in psychology.

Best Scientists Citing Nathan R. Kuncel

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles