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 38 8942 8352 4741 4315 73 5029

Nigel P. Field publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Nigel P. Field between 1986 and 2021, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Nigel P. Field published across 36 years, from 1986 to 2021, averaging 2 papers a year. Output peaked at 10 publications in 2001. 1 of the 73 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
2 4 6 8 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1986 to 2021. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 10. Peak 10 publications in 2001. 1986: 1 publication 1987: 0 publications 1988: 0 publications 1989: 0 publications 1990: 0 publications 1991: 1 publication 1992: 0 publications 1993: 1 publication 1994: 0 publications 1995: 1 publication 1996: 0 publications 1997: 3 publications 1998: 4 publications 1999: 2 publications 2000: 2 publications 2001: 10 publications 2002: 2 publications 2003: 3 publications 2004: 2 publications 2005: 2 publications 2006: 4 publications 2007: 3 publications 2008: 3 publications 2009: 3 publications 2010: 2 publications 2011: 3 publications 2012: 0 publications 2013: 5 publications 2014: 3 publications 2015: 1 publication 2016: 3 publications 2017: 5 publications 2018: 1 publication 2019: 2 publications 2020: 0 publications 2021: 1 publication
1986 2021

73 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Nigel P. Field: publications per year, 1986 to 2021
Year Publications
1986 1
1987 0
1988 0
1989 0
1990 0
1991 1
1992 0
1993 1
1994 0
1995 1
1996 0
1997 3
1998 4
1999 2
2000 2
2001 10
2002 2
2003 3
2004 2
2005 2
2006 4
2007 3
2008 3
2009 3
2010 2
2011 3
2012 0
2013 5
2014 3
2015 1
2016 3
2017 5
2018 1
2019 2
2020 0
2021 1
Total 73
Download as CSV

Nigel P. Field 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 Nigel P. Field 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, 71–80 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: 73 publications — 5th percentile

5% 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 73
81–90 605
91–100 713
101–110 736
111–120 686
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

Nigel P. Field 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 Nigel P. Field 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, 38–39 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: 38 D-Index — 24th percentile

24% 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
34–35 671
36–37 659
38–39 641 38
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

Overview

Nigel P. Field is affiliated with Palo Alto University in the United States. Their academic profile is characterized by an absence of listed recent papers, frequent co-authors, or known publication venues, indicating either a nascent research output or a more practice-oriented professional focus within the institution.

The scientist's record does not include specified main fields or subfields of study, suggesting either a multidisciplinary approach that resists narrow categorization or limited publicly available information regarding their specific research domains.

Similarly, there are no identified main topics of work associated with Nigel P. Field. The absence of data on frequent co-authors and collaborative patterns may imply independent research activity or unavailable metadata connecting the scholar to broader research networks.

Regarding publication achievements, there are no documented book publications or named publishing houses linked to their work. This further reflects a limited visible footprint in terms of monographs or edited volumes within academic publishing.

No formal awards or recognitions have been recorded, and Nigel P. Field is currently active, with no indication of being deceased.

This profile highlights the limited availability of comprehensive bibliometric and academic contributions for Nigel P. Field at this time.

Best Publications

  • CONTINUING BONDS IN BEREAVEMENT: AN ATTACHMENT THEORY BASED PERSPECTIVE

    Nigel P. Field;Beryl Gao;Lisa Paderna

  • Continuing Bonds, Risk Factors for Complicated Grief, and Adjustment to Bereavement

    Nigel P. Field;Charles Filanosky

  • The relation of continuing attachment to adjustment in conjugal bereavement.

    Nigel P. Field;Christina Nichols;Are Holen;Mardi J. Horowitz

  • Self-Enhancement as a Buffer Against Extreme Adversity: Civil War in Bosnia and Traumatic Loss in the United States

    George A. Bonanno;Nigel P. Field;Azemina Kovacevic;Stacey Kaltman

  • Continuing bonds and adjustment at 5 years after the death of a spouse.

    Nigel P. Field;Eval Gal-Oz;George A. Bonanno

  • Relationships of perceived stress to coping, attachment and social support among HIV-positive persons

    C. Koopman;C. Gore-Felton;F. Marouf;L. D. Butler

  • Role of attachment in response to pet loss.

    Nigel P. Field;Lisa Orsini;Roni Gavish;Wendy Packman

  • Parental styles in the intergenerational transmission of trauma stemming from the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia.

    Nigel P. Field;Sophear Muong;Vannavuth Sochanvimean

  • Selective processing of visual alcohol cues in abstinent alcoholics: An approach-avoidance conflict?☆

    Kjell Morten Stormark;Nigel P. Field;Kenneth Hugdahl;Mardi Horowitz

  • CONTINUING BONDS IN COPING WITH THE DEATH OF A HUSBAND

    Nigel P Field;Michael Friedrichs

  • Probable posttraumatic stress disorder and disability in Cambodia: associations with perceived justice, desire for revenge, and attitudes toward the Khmer Rouge trials

    Jeffrey H Sonis;James L. Gibson;James L. Gibson;Joop T.V.M. De Jong;Joop T.V.M. De Jong;Nigel P. Field

  • Unresolved Grief and Continuing Bonds: An Attachment Perspective

    Nigel P. Field

  • Examining the Delayed Grief Hypothesis Across 5 Years of Bereavement

    George A. Bonanno;Nigel P. Field

  • Interpersonal Problems and Their Relationship to Sexual Revictimization Among Women Sexually Abused in Childhood

    Catherine Classen;Nigel P. Field;Cheryl Koopman;Kirsten Nevill-Manning

  • Attachment Style in Adjustment to Conjugal Bereavement

    Nigel P. Field;Eva C. Sundin

  • The impact of Prader-Willi syndrome on the family's quality of life and caregiving, and the unaffected siblings' psychosocial adjustment

    M. M. Mazaheri;R. D. Rae-Seebach;H. E. Preston;M. Schmidt

  • Revictimization and information processing in women survivors of childhood sexual abuse

    Nigel P Field;Catherine Classen;Lisa D Butler;Cheryl Koopman

  • "It was never that bad": Biased recall of grief and long-term adjustment to the death of a spouse

    Martin A. Safer;George A. Bonanno;Nigel P. Field

  • Continuing Bonds and Psychosocial Adjustment in Pet Loss

    Wendy Packman;Nigel P. Field;Betty J. Carmack;Rama Ronen

  • Whether to relinquish or maintain a bond with the deceased.

    Nigel P. Field

Frequent Co-Authors

Mardi J. Horowitz
Mardi J. Horowitz University of California, San Francisco
Catherine C. Classen
Catherine C. Classen University of Toronto
George A. Bonanno
George A. Bonanno Columbia University
David Spiegel
David Spiegel Stanford University
Daniel Hart
Daniel Hart Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Eve B. Carlson
Eve B. Carlson VA Palo Alto Health Care System
Cheryl Koopman
Cheryl Koopman Stanford University
Lisa D. Butler
Lisa D. Butler University at Buffalo, State University of New York
Richard A. Bryant
Richard A. Bryant University of New South Wales
Josef I. Ruzek
Josef I. Ruzek University of Colorado Colorado Springs

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 psychology opens the door to a variety of related fields, including social work, counseling, and human services. Many students interested in psychology consider online social work degrees as an alternative or complementary path. These programs offer flexibility, affordability, and direct routes to rewarding careers in mental health and community support.

If you’re looking for options that fit your budget, it’s important to research programs in different states. For example, you can find affordable social work degrees in Atlanta and the cheapest social work degrees in Arizona. Students in the Northeast may find the cheapest social work degrees in Boston appealing, while those on the West Coast can explore affordable social work programs in California.

Pursuing these accredited online programs can lead to roles as social workers, case managers, therapists, and more. Whether you choose psychology or a related degree, understanding your options and comparing program costs can help you make the best decision for your future career in mental health and social services.

Best Scientists Citing Nigel P. Field

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles