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 34 10270 9612 5394 4925 101 4277

Peter E. Clayson publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Peter E. Clayson between 2011 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Peter E. Clayson published across 16 years, from 2011 to 2026, averaging 7.4 papers a year. Output peaked at 20 publications in 2021. 16 of the 118 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2011 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 20. Peak 20 publications in 2021. 2011: 6 publications 2012: 6 publications 2013: 6 publications 2014: 3 publications 2015: 3 publications 2016: 3 publications 2017: 4 publications 2018: 1 publication 2019: 8 publications 2020: 10 publications 2021: 20 publications 2022: 5 publications 2023: 14 publications 2024: 13 publications 2025: 14 publications 2026: 2 publications
2011 2026

118 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Peter E. Clayson: publications per year, 2011 to 2026
Year Publications
2011 6
2012 6
2013 6
2014 3
2015 3
2016 3
2017 4
2018 1
2019 8
2020 10
2021 20
2022 5
2023 14
2024 13
2025 14
2026 2
Total 118
Download as CSV

Peter E. Clayson 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 Peter E. Clayson 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, 101–110 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: 101 publications — 21st percentile

21% 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
101–110 736 101
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

Peter E. Clayson 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 Peter E. Clayson 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, 34–35 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: 34 D-Index — 13th percentile

13% 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 34
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

Overview

Peter E. Clayson is a researcher affiliated with the University of California, Los Angeles, United States. Their work primarily focuses on neuroscience and psychology, with significant contributions to cognitive neuroscience and experimental and cognitive psychology.

Their research covers diverse subfields including psychiatry and mental health, clinical psychology, and general decision sciences. The main topics of their work include:

  • Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Peter E. Clayson has published extensively in various scientific journals. The most frequent publication venues include:

  • International Journal of Psychophysiology (14 publications)
  • Psychophysiology (11 publications)
  • Schizophrenia Research (4 publications)
  • Cortex (2 publications)
  • NeuroImage (2 publications)

Some of their recent papers are as follows:

  • "#EEGManyLabs: Investigating the replicability of influential EEG experiments," 2021, Cortex
  • "The data-processing multiverse of event-related potentials (ERPs): A roadmap for the optimization and standardization of ERP processing and reduction pipelines," 2021, NeuroImage
  • "Moderators of the internal consistency of error-related negativity scores: A meta-analysis of internal consistency estimates," 2020, Psychophysiology
  • "Data quality and reliability metrics for event-related potentials (ERPs): The utility of subject-level reliability," 2021, International Journal of Psychophysiology
  • "Evaluating the internal consistency of subtraction-based and residualized difference scores: Considerations for psychometric reliability analyses of event-related potentials," 2021, Psychophysiology

Collaborations form an essential part of their research, with frequent co-authors including:

  • Michael J. Larson
  • Scott A. Baldwin
  • Gregory A. Light
  • Amanda Holbrook
  • Philippe Rast

Best Publications

  • Making sense of all the conflict: a theoretical review and critique of conflict-related ERPs.

    Michael J. Larson;Peter E. Clayson;Ann Clawson

  • How does noise affect amplitude and latency measurement of event‐related potentials (ERPs)? A methodological critique and simulation study

    Peter E. Clayson;Scott A. Baldwin;Michael J. Larson

  • Conflict adaptation and sequential trial effects: support for the conflict monitoring theory.

    Peter E. Clayson;Michael J. Larson

  • Methodological reporting behavior, sample sizes, and statistical power in studies of event-related potentials: Barriers to reproducibility and replicability.

    Peter E. Clayson;Peter E. Clayson;Kaylie A. Carbine;Scott A. Baldwin;Michael J. Larson

  • ERP Reliability Analysis (ERA) Toolbox: An open-source toolbox for analyzing the reliability of event-related brain potentials.

    Peter E. Clayson;Gregory A. Miller

  • Psychometric considerations in the measurement of event-related brain potentials: Guidelines for measurement and reporting.

    Peter E. Clayson;Gregory A. Miller

  • #EEGManyLabs : investigating the replicability of influential EEG experiments

    Yuri G. Pavlov;Nika Adamian;Stefan Appelhoff;Mahnaz Arvaneh

  • The relationship between cognitive performance and electrophysiological indices of performance monitoring

    Michael J. Larson;Peter E. Clayson

  • Sex differences in electrophysiological indices of conflict monitoring

    Peter E. Clayson;Ann Clawson;Michael J. Larson

  • Performance monitoring following conflict: Internal adjustments in cognitive control?

    Michael J. Larson;Peter E. Clayson;Scott A. Baldwin

  • Psychometric properties of conflict monitoring and conflict adaptation indices: response time and conflict N2 event-related potentials.

    Peter E. Clayson;Michael J. Larson

  • Effects of repetition priming on electrophysiological and behavioral indices of conflict adaptation and cognitive control.

    Peter E. Clayson;Michael J. Larson

  • Sex differences in error-related performance monitoring.

    Michael J. Larson;Mikle South;Peter E. Clayson

  • Cognitive control in mild traumatic brain injury: conflict monitoring and conflict adaptation.

    Michael J. Larson;Thomas J. Farrer;Peter E. Clayson

  • The dependability of electrophysiological measurements of performance monitoring in a clinical sample: A generalizability and decision analysis of the ERN and Pe.

    Scott A. Baldwin;Michael J. Larson;Peter E. Clayson

  • The Data-Processing Multiverse of Event-Related Potentials (ERPs): A Roadmap for the Optimization and Standardization of ERP Processing and Reduction Pipelines

    Peter E. Clayson;Scott A. Baldwin;Harold A. Rocha;Michael J. Larson

  • Cognitive control adjustments in healthy older and younger adults: Conflict adaptation, the error-related negativity (ERN), and evidence of generalized decline with age.

    Michael J. Larson;Peter E. Clayson;Peter E. Clayson;Cierra M. Keith;Isaac J. Hunt

  • Cognitive Control and Conflict Adaptation Similarities in Children and Adults

    Michael J Larson;Ann Clawson;Peter E Clayson;Mikle South

  • Cognitive control adjustments and conflict adaptation in major depressive disorder

    Ann Clawson;Peter E. Clayson;Peter E. Clayson;Michael J. Larson

  • Moderators of the internal consistency of error-related negativity scores: A meta-analysis of internal consistency estimates.

    Peter E. Clayson

  • Cognitive control and conflict adaptation in youth with high-functioning autism

    Michael J. Larson;Mikle South;Peter E. Clayson;Ann Clawson

Frequent Co-Authors

Michael J. Larson
Michael J. Larson Brigham Young University
Scott A. Baldwin
Scott A. Baldwin Brigham Young University
Mikle South
Mikle South Brigham Young University
Michael F. Green
Michael F. Green University of California, Los Angeles
Gregory A. Miller
Gregory A. Miller University of California, Los Angeles
Junghee Lee
Junghee Lee University of California, Los Angeles
Neal R. Swerdlow
Neal R. Swerdlow University of California, San Diego
Jonathan K. Wynn
Jonathan K. Wynn University of California, Los Angeles
Keith H. Nuechterlein
Keith H. Nuechterlein University of California, Los Angeles
Robert S. Kern
Robert S. Kern University of California, Los Angeles

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

Pursuing a degree in psychology can open doors to several rewarding career options, especially in the fields of counseling and mental health. Many students opt for online psychology degrees due to flexibility and convenience, which can also help them meet the educational requirements for licensure as a counselor.

It’s important to understand that licensing requirements vary by state. For example, if you’re aiming to become a Licensed Professional Counselor, you will need to follow specific state guidelines. You can find detailed steps on how to get an lpc license in Connecticut or review the Delaware lpc licensure requirements to ensure you are on the right path.

Similarly, for those interested in working in Florida, it’s vital to consult the Florida lpc licensure requirements. Meanwhile, aspiring counselors in Georgia should familiarize themselves with the lpc licensure requirements in Georgia. Each state outlines educational prerequisites, supervised experience, and examination details you must fulfill before practicing.

Exploring these pathways and understanding licensure criteria can help you seamlessly transition from your online psychology studies to a professional counseling career.

Best Scientists Citing Peter E. Clayson

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles