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 68 2462 2251 121 117 188 18928

Philip D. Parker publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Philip D. Parker between 2005 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Philip D. Parker published across 21 years, from 2005 to 2025, averaging 11.6 papers a year. Output peaked at 29 publications in 2021. 23 of the 243 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20 25
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2005 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 29. Peak 29 publications in 2021. 2005: 3 publications 2006: 2 publications 2007: 1 publication 2008: 2 publications 2009: 0 publications 2010: 2 publications 2011: 2 publications 2012: 5 publications 2013: 7 publications 2014: 13 publications 2015: 26 publications 2016: 20 publications 2017: 19 publications 2018: 14 publications 2019: 20 publications 2020: 17 publications 2021: 29 publications 2022: 22 publications 2023: 16 publications 2024: 14 publications 2025: 9 publications
2005 2025

243 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Philip D. Parker: publications per year, 2005 to 2025
Year Publications
2005 3
2006 2
2007 1
2008 2
2009 0
2010 2
2011 2
2012 5
2013 7
2014 13
2015 26
2016 20
2017 19
2018 14
2019 20
2020 17
2021 29
2022 22
2023 16
2024 14
2025 9
Total 243
Download as CSV

Philip D. Parker 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 Philip D. Parker 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, 181–190 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: 188 publications — 65th percentile

65% 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
111–120 686
121–130 670
131–140 644
141–150 597
151–160 576
161–170 477
171–180 450
181–190 397 188
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

Philip D. Parker 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 Philip D. Parker 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, 68–69 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: 68 D-Index — 79th percentile

79% 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
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 68
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

Philip D. Parker is affiliated with the Australian Catholic University in Australia. Their research spans the fields of Psychology and Social Sciences, with a particular focus on subfields such as Education, Social Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Clinical Psychology, and Developmental and Educational Psychology.

Their research topics cover a range of areas including Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports, Education, Achievement, and Giftedness, Physical Activity and Health, Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet, School Choice and Performance, Early Childhood Education and Development, and Behavioral Health and Interventions.

Frequent co-authors in their publications include Herbert W. Marsh, Theresa Dicke, Jiesi Guo, Geetanjali Basarkod, and Taren Sanders.

Philip D. Parker has contributed to several publication venues, often publishing findings in:

  • Journal of Educational Psychology
  • Educational Psychology Review
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
  • Learning and Instruction
  • Review of Educational Research

Among their recent papers are:

  • Effect of exercise for depression: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials, 2024, BMJ
  • A classification system for teachers' motivational behaviors recommended in self-determination theory interventions, 2023, Journal of Educational Psychology
  • Video Improves Learning in Higher Education: A Systematic Review, 2021, Review of Educational Research
  • Psychological Comparison Processes and Self-Concept in Relation to Five Distinct Frame-Of-Reference Effects: Pan-Human Cross-Cultural Generalizability over 68 Countries, 2020, European Journal of Personality
  • Combinations of Physical Activity, Sedentary Behavior, and Sleep Duration and Their Associations With Physical, Psychological, and Educational Outcomes in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review, 2022, American Journal of Epidemiology

Best Publications

  • Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling: An Integration of the Best Features of Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis

    Herbert Warren Marsh;Alexandre J. S. Morin;Phillip David Parker;Gurvinder Kaur

  • Domain-Specific Physical Activity and Mental Health: A Meta-analysis.

    Rhiannon Lee White;Mark J. Babic;Philip D. Parker;David R. Lubans

  • Motivating young language learners: A longitudinal model of self-determined motivation in elementary school foreign language classes.

    W.L. Quint Oga-Baldwin;Yoshiyuki Nakata;Philip Parker;Richard M. Ryan

  • The murky distinction between self-concept and self-efficacy. Beware of lurking jingle-jangle fallacies

    Herbert W. Marsh;Reinhard Pekrun;Philip D. Parker;Kou Murayama

  • Self-efficacy in classroom management, classroom disturbances, and emotional exhaustion: A moderated mediation analysis of teacher candidates.

    Theresa Dicke;Phillip David Parker;Herbert Warren Marsh;Mareike Kunter

  • Juxtaposing math self-efficacy and self-concept as predictors of long-term achievement outcomes

    Philip David Parker;Herbert W. Marsh;Joseph Ciarrochi;Sarah Marshall

  • Passion: Does one scale fit all? Construct validity of two-factor passion scale and psychometric invariance over different activities and languages.

    Herbert W. Marsh;Robert J. Vallerand;Marc-André K. Lafrenière;Philip D. Parker

  • Emotion regulation strategies in daily life: mindfulness, cognitive reappraisal and emotion suppression

    Robert Brockman;Joseph Ciarrochi;Philip Parker;Todd Kashdan

  • Teachers’ workplace well-being: Exploring a process model of goal orientation, coping behavior, engagement, and burnout

    Philip D Parker;Philip D Parker;Andrew J Martin;Susan H Colmar;Gregory A Liem

  • Scaling-up an efficacious school-based physical activity intervention: Study protocol for the 'Internet-based Professional Learning to help teachers support Activity in Youth' (iPLAY) cluster randomized controlled trial and scale-up implementation evaluation

    Christopher Sean Lonsdale;Taren Grant Sanders;Kristen E. Cohen;Philip Parker

  • Achievement, motivation, and educational choices: A longitudinal study of expectancy and value using a multiplicative perspective

    Jiesi Guo;Philip D. Parker;Herbert W. Marsh;Alexandre J. S. Morin

  • Is Self-Esteem a Cause or Consequence of Social Support? A 4-Year Longitudinal Study.

    Sarah L. Marshall;Phillip D. Parker;Joseph Ciarrochi;Patrick C.L. Heaven

  • What to do when scalar invariance fails: The extended alignment method for multi-group factor analysis comparison of latent means across many groups.

    Herbert W. Marsh;Jiesi Guo;Philip D. Parker;Benjamin Nagengast

  • Self-compassion protects against the negative effects of low self-esteem : a longitudinal study in a large adolescent sample

    Sarah Marshall;Phillip D Parker;Joseph Ciarrochi;Baljinder K Sahdra

  • Video Improves Learning in Higher Education: A Systematic Review:

    Michael Noetel;Shantell Griffith;Oscar Delaney;Oscar Delaney;Taren Sanders

  • Expectancy-value in mathematics, gender and socioeconomic background as predictors of achievement and aspirations : A multi-cohort study

    Jiesi Guo;Herbert W. Marsh;Herbert W. Marsh;Herbert W. Marsh;Philip D. Parker;Alexandre J.S. Morin

  • Beginning teachers' efficacy and emotional exhaustion: Latent changes, reciprocity, and the influence of professional knowledge

    Theresa Dicke;Philip D. Parker;Doris Holzberger;Olga Kunina-Habenicht

  • Validating the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ-II) Using Set-ESEM: Identifying Psychosocial Risk Factors in a Sample of School Principals.

    Theresa Dicke;Herbert W. Marsh;Philip Riley;Philip D. Parker

  • The reciprocal relations between self-concept, motivation and achievement: juxtaposing academic self-concept and achievement goal orientations for mathematics success

    Marjorie Seaton;Philip Parker;Herbert W. Marsh;Rhonda G. Craven

Frequent Co-Authors

Herbert W. Marsh
Herbert W. Marsh Australian Catholic University
Jiesi Guo
Jiesi Guo Australian Catholic University
Alexandre J. S. Morin
Alexandre J. S. Morin Concordia University
Chris Lonsdale
Chris Lonsdale Australian Catholic University
Joseph Ciarrochi
Joseph Ciarrochi Australian Catholic University
Baljinder K. Sahdra
Baljinder K. Sahdra Australian Catholic University
Thomas Astell-Burt
Thomas Astell-Burt University of Wollongong
Reinhard Pekrun
Reinhard Pekrun Australian Catholic University
Rhonda Craven
Rhonda Craven Australian Catholic University
John Jerrim
John Jerrim University College London

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 career in psychology opens the door to a range of online degrees and professional opportunities. Many students opt for flexible online programs that prepare them for roles in counseling, mental health, education, and research.

Pursuing a career as a Licensed Professional Counselor (LPC) is a common pathway for psychology graduates. However, requirements can vary greatly depending on location. For example, the process for becoming a licensed therapist in Mesa differs from Miami licensed therapist requirements. Each state sets its own standards for education, clinical supervision hours, and examinations.

If you are interested in becoming a licensed therapist in Milwaukee or becoming a licensed therapist in Minneapolis, it’s important to review specific local requirements. Consulting official state resources or speaking with academic advisors can help clarify the path forward. No matter where you choose to practice, earning your degree online can provide the flexibility and quality education you need for a rewarding career in psychology.

Best Scientists Citing Philip D. Parker

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles