World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
31
Citations
25558
World Ranking
11022
National Ranking
634

Penelope J. Oakes 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 Penelope J. Oakes 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: 344 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: 34 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 701–705 publications: 5 scientists 706+ publications: 100 scientists
31 publications 706+

This scientist: 44 publications — 1st percentile

1% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 706 publications or more.

Penelope J. Oakes 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 Penelope J. Oakes 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: 559 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: 87 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: 79 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: 31 D-Index — 3rd percentile

3% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Penelope J. Oakes is affiliated with the Australian National University in Australia. Their academic profile is characterized by a focus on research within the scope of their institutional association.

No recorded data is available regarding recent papers authored by this researcher, including titles, publication years, or venues, which suggests that either their works are not cataloged in the provided source or that their publication record is currently limited in publicly accessible databases.

Similarly, there is no information regarding frequent co-authors or collaboration networks. This lack of co-authorship details means that insights into their research partnerships or collaborative efforts cannot be specified.

The absence of details on frequent publication venues limits the ability to identify the journals or conferences in which they typically disseminate their research findings.

The profile does not list any book publications, thus no information is available about contributions to academic books or monographs published by identified publishers.

Information about main fields of study, subfields, or specific topics of work associated with Penelope J. Oakes is also not provided, making it difficult to ascertain particular areas of academic interest or specialization.

No awards or distinctions have been reported, indicating no publicly recorded honors or recognitions linked to their academic career.

This profile reflects the current availability of data and underscores the importance of including comprehensive publication and research details for a clearer academic evaluation.

Best Publications

  • Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory.

    John C. Turner;Michael A. Hogg;Penelope J. Oakes;Stephen D. Reicher

  • Self and Collective: Cognition and Social Context:

    John C. Turner;Penelope J. Oakes;S. Alexander Haslam;Craig McGarty

  • Stereotyping and Social Reality

    Penelope J. Oakes;S. Alexander Haslam;John C. Turner

  • The significance of the social identity concept for social psychology with reference to individualism, interactionism and social influence

    John C. Turner;Penelope J. Oakes

  • Perceiving people as group members: The role of fit in the salience of social categorizations

    Penelope J. Oakes;John C. Turner;S. Alexander Haslam

  • Social Identity Salience and the Emergence of Stereotype Consensus

    S. Alexander Haslam;Penelope J. Oakes;Katherine J. Reynolds;John C. Turner

  • The social psychology of stereotyping and group life

    R. Spears;P.J. Oakes;N. Ellemers;S.A. Haslam

  • Self-categorization theory and social influence.

    John C. Turner;Penelope J. Oakes

  • Context‐dependent variation in social stereotyping 1: The effects of intergroup relations as mediated by social change and frame of reference

    S. Alexander Haslam;John C. Turner;Penelope J. Oakes;Craig McGarty

  • Stereotyping and social influence : The mediation of stereotype applicability and sharedness by the views of in-group and out-group members

    S. Alexander Haslam;Penelope J. Oakes;Craig McGarty;John C. Turner

  • Social categorization and intergroup behaviour: Does minimal intergroup discrimination make social identity more positive?

    Unknown

  • The group as a basis for emergent stereotype consensus.

    S. Alexander Haslam;John C. Turner;Penelope J. Oakes;Craig McGarty

  • Social categorization and group homogeneity: changes in the perceived applicability of stereotype content as a function of comparative context and trait favourableness.

    S. Alexander Haslam;Penelope J. Oakes;John C. Turner;Craig McGarty

  • Contextual changes in the prototypicality of extreme and moderate outgroup members

    S. Alexander Haslam;Penelope J. Oakes;Craig McGarty;John C. Turner

  • Social Identity and the Romance of Leadership: The Importance of Being Seen To Be 'Doing It for Us'

    S. Alexander Haslam;Michael J. Platow;John C. Turner;Katherine J. Reynolds

  • Distinctiveness and the salience of social category memberships: Is there an automatic perceptual bias towards novelty?

    Penelope Oakes;John C. Turner

  • Is Limited Information Processing Capacity the Cause of Social Stereotyping

    Penelope J. Oakes;John C. Turner

  • Beyond dependence: An identity approach to social power and domination

    Bernd Simon;Penelope Oakes

  • When do stereotypes become really consensual? Investigating the group-based dynamics of the consensualization process

    S. Alexander Haslam;John C. Turner;Penelope J. Oakes;Katherine J. Reynolds

  • The effect of comparative context on central tendency and variability judgements and the evaluation of group characteristics

    Bertjan Doosje;S. Alexander Haslam;Russell Spears;Penelope J. Oakes

  • The socially structured mind.

    John C. Turner;Penelope J. Oakes

  • Stereotypes as Rational, Flexible, and Meaningful Self-Referent Responses to Social Context@@@The Social Psychology of Stereotyping and Group Life

    Michael A. Hogg;Russell Spears;Penelope J. Oakes;Naomi Ellemers

Frequent Co-Authors

John C. Turner
John C. Turner Australian National University
S. Alexander Haslam
S. Alexander Haslam University of Queensland
Katherine J. Reynolds
Katherine J. Reynolds Australian National University
Craig McGarty
Craig McGarty Western Sydney University
Russell Spears
Russell Spears University of Groningen
Michelle K. Ryan
Michelle K. Ryan University of Exeter
Michael A. Hogg
Michael A. Hogg Claremont Graduate University
Naomi Ellemers
Naomi Ellemers Utrecht University
Bertjan Doosje
Bertjan Doosje University of Amsterdam
Stephen Reicher
Stephen Reicher University of St Andrews

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

Studying psychology in the USA can open doors to a variety of impactful career pathways, particularly in the booming field of applied behavior analysis (ABA). Many individuals interested in working with children, those with autism, or in clinical settings choose to pursue Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA) certification. Earning a BCBA requires both online and in-person education, as well as supervised practice.

The requirements for becoming a BCBA can vary by location. For example, you can explore how to become a bcba in New York City, where local licensing and fieldwork opportunities may differ from other regions. Similarly, learning about bcba certification requirements in Newark, or understanding how to become a bcba in Norfolk, can help you plan your path based on your intended location. For those in the western U.S., finding out how to become a bcba in North Las Vegas can highlight unique certification steps and local job prospects.

With flexible online degree programs, you can start your journey to a rewarding psychology career from anywhere, while tailoring your studies to a specific region’s requirements and opportunities.

Best Scientists Citing Penelope J. Oakes