World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
42
Citations
6819
World Ranking
7589
National Ranking
4081

Nina Simmons-Mackie 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 Nina Simmons-Mackie 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: 114 publications — 29th percentile

29% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Nina Simmons-Mackie 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 Nina Simmons-Mackie 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: 42 D-Index — 36th percentile

36% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Nina Simmons-Mackie is affiliated with Southeastern Louisiana University in the United States. Their research primarily spans the intersecting fields of Neuroscience, Medicine, and Health Professions, with notable contributions to subfields including Cognitive Neuroscience, General Health Professions, Rehabilitation, Sociology and Political Science, and Psychiatry and Mental Health.

The scientist's main topics of work encompass:

  • Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Interpreting and Communication in Healthcare
  • Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Delphi Technique in Research
  • Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health disparities and outcomes

Simmons-Mackie has published research in various venues, with a concentration in aphasia and communication disorders. Frequent publication venues include:

  • Aphasiology
  • American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
  • Disability and Rehabilitation
  • International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders
  • Journal of Communication Disorders

Collaborations with multiple co-authors are evident, with recurring partnerships involving:

  • Linda Worrall
  • Jamie H. Azios
  • Aura Kagan
  • Katie Strong
  • Brent Archer

Selected recent publications by Simmons-Mackie and colleagues include:

  • Establishing consensus on a definition of aphasia: an e-Delphi study of international aphasia researchers, 2020, Aphasiology
  • Friendship matters: a research agenda for aphasia, 2021, Aphasiology
  • Measuring communication as a core outcome in aphasia trials: Results of the ROMA-2 international core outcome set development meeting, 2022, International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders
  • Conversation as an Outcome of Aphasia Treatment: A Systematic Scoping Review, 2022, American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology
  • Best Practice in Post-Stroke Aphasia Services According to People with Lived Experience. A Modified Nominal Group Technique Study, 2023, Aphasiology

Best Publications

  • Training volunteers as conversation partners using "Supported Conversation for Adults with Aphasia" (SCA): a controlled trial.

    Aura Kagan;Sandra E. Black;Judith Felson Duchan;Nina Simmons-Mackie

  • Communication partner training in aphasia: a systematic review.

    Nina Simmons-Mackie;Anastasia Raymer;Elizabeth Armstrong;Audrey Holland

  • Counting what counts: A framework for capturing real‐life outcomes of aphasia intervention

    Aura Kagan;Nina Simmons‐Mackie;Alexandra Rowland;Maria Huijbregts

  • Communication Partner Training in Aphasia: An Updated Systematic Review.

    Nina Simmons-Mackie;Anastasia Raymer;Leora R. Cherney;Leora R. Cherney

  • Which outcomes are most important to people with aphasia and their families? an international nominal group technique study framed within the ICF

    Sarah J. Wallace;Linda Worrall;Tanya Rose;Guylaine Le Dorze

  • Translational Research in Aphasia: From Neuroscience to Neurorehabilitation

    Anastasia M. Raymer;Pelagie Beeson;Audrey Holland;Diane Kendall

  • Communicative access and decision making for people with aphasia: Implementing sustainable healthcare systems change

    Nina N. Simmons‐Mackie;Aura Kagan;Charlene O'Neill Christie;Maria Huijbregts

  • Qualitative research and speech-language pathology: a tutorial for the clinical realm.

    Jack S. Damico;Nina N. Simmons-Mackie

  • A set of observational measures for rating support and participation in conversation between adults with aphasia and their conversation partners.

    Aura Kagan;Joanne Winckel;Sandra Black;Judith Felson Duchan

  • Qualitative methods in aphasia research: basic issues

    Jack S. Damico;Nina Simmons-Mackie;Mary Oelschlaeger;Roberta Elman

  • Application of the ICF in aphasia.

    Nina Simmons-Mackie;Aura Kagan

  • Outcome assessment in aphasia: a survey

    Nina Simmons-Mackie;Travis T. Threats;Aura Kagan

  • Qualitative methods in aphasia research: conversation analysis

    Jack S. Damico;Mary Oelschlaeger;Nina Simmons-Mackie

  • Reformulating the definition of compensatory strategies in aphasia

    Nina N. Simmons-mackie;Jack S. Damico

  • What is aphasia? Results of an international survey

    Nina Simmons-Mackie;Chris Code;Chris Code;Elizabeth Armstrong;Lillian Stiegler

  • Treatment of Aphasia Through Family Member Training

    Nina N. Simmons-Mackie;Kevin P. Kearns;Gail Potechin

  • The assessment for living with aphasia: reliability and construct validity

    Nina Simmons-Mackie;Aura Kagan;J Charles Victor;Alex Carling-Rowland

  • Conversation therapy for aphasia: a qualitative review of the literature.

    Nina Simmons-Mackie;Meghan C. Savage;Linda Worrall

  • Management of Discourse in Group Therapy for Aphasia.

    Nina Simmons-Mackie;Roberta J. Elman;Audrey L. Holland;Jack S. Damico

  • Access and social inclusion in aphasia: Interactional principles and applications

    Nina N. Simmons‐Mackie;Jack S. Damico

  • Communication strategies used by 'good' versus 'poor' speaking partners of individuals with aphasia

    Nina Simmons-Mackie;Aura Kagan

Frequent Co-Authors

Linda Worrall
Linda Worrall University of Queensland
Leora R. Cherney
Leora R. Cherney Northwestern University
Miranda Rose
Miranda Rose La Trobe University
Audrey Holland
Audrey Holland University of Arizona
Leanne Togher
Leanne Togher University of Sydney
Anastasia M. Raymer
Anastasia M. Raymer Old Dominion University
Jeffrey S. Hoch
Jeffrey S. Hoch University of California, Davis
Laura L. Murray
Laura L. Murray University of Western Ontario
Elizabeth Rochon
Elizabeth Rochon University of Toronto
Sandra E. Black
Sandra E. Black University of Toronto

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 doors to diverse career pathways, including roles in social work, counseling, and mental health support. It’s crucial to understand that education and licensing requirements for social workers can differ greatly by state.

For instance, Texas education requirements for social workers typically insist on a bachelor’s or master’s degree in social work, depending on the desired position. Meanwhile, Utah minimum degree requirement for social workers establishes that at least a bachelor’s degree is necessary for entry-level roles, with advanced licenses requiring a master’s.

In social worker education requirements in Vermont, a bachelor’s degree allows for practice as a non-licensed social worker, but clinical practice mandates a master’s degree. Likewise, the social worker degree requirements in Virginia distinguish between levels of licenses based on educational attainment.

When considering online psychology degrees, it’s important to choose accredited programs and research your target state’s specific licensure expectations. This ensures your qualifications meet the requirements for your chosen career path.

Best Scientists Citing Nina Simmons-Mackie

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles