World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
32
Citations
3707
World Ranking
10979
National Ranking
5725

Peter Q. Pfordresher 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 Q. Pfordresher 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: 112 publications — 28th percentile

28% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Peter Q. Pfordresher 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 Q. Pfordresher 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: 32 D-Index — 6th percentile

6% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Peter Q. Pfordresher is affiliated with the University at Buffalo, State University of New York in the United States. Their research focuses broadly on the intersection of neuroscience, music perception, and audio processing, with a strong emphasis on cognitive neuroscience and experimental psychology.

Their recent publications include:

  • Globally, songs and instrumental melodies are slower and higher and use more stable pitches than speech: A Registered Report (2024, Science Advances)
  • The Prevalence and Correlates of Accurate Singing (2020, Journal of Research in Music Education)
  • Spontaneous Production Rates in Music and Speech (2021, Frontiers in Psychology)
  • Individuals with autism spectrum disorder are impaired in absolute but not relative pitch and duration matching in speech and song imitation (2021, Autism Research)
  • The Role of Long-Term Memory in Mental Transformations of Pitch (2020, Auditory Perception & Cognition)

Frequent co-authors who have collaborated extensively with Peter Q. Pfordresher include:

  • Siu-Lan Tan
  • Rom Harré
  • Emma B. Greenspon
  • Tim A. Pruitt
  • Andrea R. Halpern

Key venues where Peter Q. Pfordresher has published include:

  • Auditory Perception & Cognition
  • Music Perception An Interdisciplinary Journal
  • Attention Perception & Psychophysics
  • Psychological Research
  • Science Advances

Their main fields of study are Neuroscience and Computer Science, with subfields covering:

  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Signal Processing
  • Music
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Research topics addressed in their work span:

  • Neuroscience and Music Perception
  • Music and Audio Processing
  • Diverse Music Education Insights
  • Music Technology and Sound Studies
  • Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
  • Autism Spectrum Disorder Research

Best Publications

  • The somatotopy of speech: Phonation and articulation in the human motor cortex

    Steven Brown;Angela R. Laird;Peter Q. Pfordresher;Sarah M. Thelen

  • POOR-PITCH SINGING IN THE ABSENCE OF "TONE DEAFNESS"

    Peter Q. Pfordresher;Steven Brown

  • Enhanced production and perception of musical pitch in tone language speakers

    Peter Q. Pfordresher;Steven Brown

  • Incremental planning in sequence production.

    Caroline Palmer;Peter Q. Pfordresher

  • Psychology of Music: From Sound to Significance

    Siu-Lan Tan;Peter Pfordresher;Rom Harré

  • Imprecise singing is widespread

    Peter Q. Pfordresher;Steven Brown;Kimberly M. Meier;Michel Belyk

  • Singing Ability, Musical Self-Concept, and Future Music Participation.

    Steven M. Demorest;Jamey Kelley;Peter Q. Pfordresher

  • Native Experience with a Tone Language Enhances Pitch Discrimination and the Timing of Neural Responses to Pitch Change

    Ryan J. Giuliano;Peter Q. Pfordresher;Emily M. Stanley;Shalini Narayana

  • Effects of hearing the past, present, or future during music performance.

    Peter Q. Pfordresher;Caroline Palmer

  • Effects of delayed auditory feedback on timing of music performance.

    P. Q. Pfordresher;C. Palmer

  • Auditory feedback in music performance: Evidence for a dissociation of sequencing and timing

    Peter Q. Pfordresher

  • Coordination of perception and action in music performance

    Peter Q. Pfordresher

  • Auditory feedback in music performance: the role of melodic structure and musical skill.

    Peter Q. Pfordresher

  • Tracking Musical Patterns using Joint Accent Structure

    Mari Riess Jones;Peter Q. Pfordresher

  • The Role of Melodic and Rhythmic Accents in Musical Structure

    Peter Q. Pfordresher

  • Temporal coordination in joint music performance: effects of endogenous rhythms and auditory feedback

    Anna Zamm;Peter Q. Pfordresher;Caroline Palmer

  • Speed, accuracy, and serial order in sequence production.

    Peter Q. Pfordresher;Caroline Palmer;Melissa K. Jungers

  • Auditory imagery and the poor-pitch singer.

    Peter Q. Pfordresher;Andrea R. Halpern

  • Vocal Imitation of Song and Speech.

    James T. Mantell;Peter Q. Pfordresher

  • The neural basis of vocal pitch imitation in humans

    Michel Belyk;Peter Q. Pfordresher;Mario Liotti;Steven Brown

  • Singing with yourself: evidence for an inverse modeling account of poor-pitch singing.

    Peter Q. Pfordresher;James T. Mantell

Frequent Co-Authors

Rom Harré
Rom Harré Georgetown University
Caroline Palmer
Caroline Palmer McGill University
Andrea R. Halpern
Andrea R. Halpern Bucknell University
Steven Brown
Steven Brown McMaster University
Mario Liotti
Mario Liotti University of Padua
Emmanouil Benetos
Emmanouil Benetos Queen Mary University of London
Graham Welch
Graham Welch University College London
Fang Liu
Fang Liu Beihang University
Lauren Stewart
Lauren Stewart Goldsmiths University of London
Mari Riess Jones
Mari Riess Jones The Ohio State 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 psychology degrees online opens doors to diverse career opportunities, with marriage and family therapy (MFT) being a popular pathway. Becoming an MFT requires rigorous education and licensing, but requirements vary by location. For example, understanding how to become a marriage and family therapist in San Diego will help you navigate specific regional criteria for coursework and internships.

Aspiring therapists can also benefit from learning how to become a marriage and family therapist in San Francisco, as licensing and certification processes may include city-specific stipulations. Furthermore, understanding San Jose mft certification requirements can help clarify the steps needed after obtaining a psychology degree, such as supervised experience and state exams.

For those comparing programs, researching Santa Ana mft education requirements can be key to determining which online or hybrid degree best fits your goals. Overall, studying psychology in the USA offers a variety of online pathways, each with its own licensure considerations, making in-depth research essential for informed career decisions.

Best Scientists Citing Peter Q. Pfordresher

Trending Scientists