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 49 5547 5153 3028 2746 118 17203

Philip L. Roth publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Philip L. Roth between 1954 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Philip L. Roth published across 72 years, from 1954 to 2025, averaging 2.6 papers a year. Output peaked at 12 publications in 2017. 20 of the 187 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1954 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 12. Peak 12 publications in 2017. 1954: 1 publication 1955: 0 publications 1956: 0 publications 1957: 2 publications 1958: 0 publications 1959: 1 publication 1960: 0 publications 1961: 0 publications 1962: 0 publications 1963: 0 publications 1964: 0 publications 1965: 0 publications 1966: 0 publications 1967: 2 publications 1968: 0 publications 1969: 2 publications 1970: 0 publications 1971: 0 publications 1972: 2 publications 1973: 1 publication 1974: 1 publication 1975: 1 publication 1976: 1 publication 1977: 0 publications 1978: 0 publications 1979: 0 publications 1980: 2 publications 1981: 1 publication 1982: 0 publications 1983: 1 publication 1984: 0 publications 1985: 1 publication 1986: 0 publications 1987: 2 publications 1988: 3 publications 1989: 1 publication 1990: 2 publications 1991: 0 publications 1992: 2 publications 1993: 2 publications 1994: 4 publications 1995: 2 publications 1996: 3 publications 1997: 1 publication 1998: 6 publications 1999: 5 publications 2000: 4 publications 2001: 6 publications 2002: 1 publication 2003: 3 publications 2004: 3 publications 2005: 6 publications 2006: 4 publications 2007: 2 publications 2008: 9 publications 2009: 1 publication 2010: 2 publications 2011: 7 publications 2012: 7 publications 2013: 5 publications 2014: 6 publications 2015: 4 publications 2016: 7 publications 2017: 12 publications 2018: 4 publications 2019: 5 publications 2020: 5 publications 2021: 3 publications 2022: 4 publications 2023: 5 publications 2024: 9 publications 2025: 11 publications
1954 2025

187 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Philip L. Roth: publications per year, 1954 to 2025
Year Publications
1954 1
1955 0
1956 0
1957 2
1958 0
1959 1
1960 0
1961 0
1962 0
1963 0
1964 0
1965 0
1966 0
1967 2
1968 0
1969 2
1970 0
1971 0
1972 2
1973 1
1974 1
1975 1
1976 1
1977 0
1978 0
1979 0
1980 2
1981 1
1982 0
1983 1
1984 0
1985 1
1986 0
1987 2
1988 3
1989 1
1990 2
1991 0
1992 2
1993 2
1994 4
1995 2
1996 3
1997 1
1998 6
1999 5
2000 4
2001 6
2002 1
2003 3
2004 3
2005 6
2006 4
2007 2
2008 9
2009 1
2010 2
2011 7
2012 7
2013 5
2014 6
2015 4
2016 7
2017 12
2018 4
2019 5
2020 5
2021 3
2022 4
2023 5
2024 9
2025 11
Total 187
Download as CSV

Philip L. Roth 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 L. Roth 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, 111–120 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: 118 publications — 31st percentile

31% 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
111–120 686 118
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

Philip L. Roth 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 L. Roth 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, 48–49 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: 49 D-Index — 52nd percentile

52% 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 49
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

Philip L. Roth is affiliated with Clemson University in the United States. Their research spans multiple domains, focusing primarily on the interplay between social and organizational psychology, digital media, and human resource management.

Their recent scholarly output includes several articles published in prominent journals. These publications are:

  • "What's on job seekers' social media sites? A content analysis and effects of structure on recruiter judgments and predictive validity." (2020, Journal of Applied Psychology)
  • "Social Media and Selection: Political Issue Similarity, Liking, and the Moderating Effect of Social Media Platform." (2020, MIS Quarterly)
  • "Organizational political affiliation and job seekers: If I don't identify with your party, am I still attracted?" (2021, Journal of Applied Psychology)
  • "Post-traumatic stress disorder and hiring: The role of social media disclosures on stigma and hiring assessments of veterans." (2022, Personnel Psychology)
  • "Doxing, political affiliation, and type of information: Effects on suspicion, perceived similarity, and hiring-related judgments." (2023, Journal of Applied Psychology)

Their work is published largely in the Journal of Applied Psychology with seven publications, as well as in venues such as Academy of Management Proceedings (11 publications), SSRN Electronic Journal (3 publications), Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2 publications), and Journal of Management Scientific Reports (2 publications).

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Roth include:

  • Jason Bennett Thatcher (15 collaborations)
  • Wenxi Pu (8 collaborations)
  • Chad H. Van Iddekinge (6 collaborations)
  • John D. Arnold (6 collaborations)
  • In-Sue Oh (6 collaborations)

Their research covers a variety of subfields, primarily:

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Information Systems

The main topics they investigate include:

  • Employer Branding and e-HRM
  • Digital Marketing and Social Media
  • Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Medical Education and Admissions
  • Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection

Best Publications

  • How Important are Job Attitudes? Meta-Analytic Comparisons of Integrative Behavioral Outcomes and Time Sequences

    David A. Harrison;Daniel A. Newman;Philip L. Roth

  • MISSING DATA: A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW FOR APPLIED PSYCHOLOGISTS

    Philip L. Roth

  • Risk propensity differences between entrepreneurs and managers: A meta-analytic review.

    Wayne H. Stewart Jr.;Philip L. Roth

  • A Meta-Analytic Review of Predictors of Job Performance for Salespeople

    Andrew J. Vinchur;Jeffery S. Schippmann;Fred S. Switzer Iii;Philip L. Roth

  • Effects of group feedback, goal setting, and incentives on organizational productivity.

    Robert D. Pritchard;Steven D. Jones;Philip L. Roth;Karla K. Stuebing

  • Identification and meta-analytic assessment of psychological constructs measured in employment interviews.

    Allen I. Huffcutt;James M. Conway;Philip L. Roth;Nancy J. Stone

  • A Meta-Analysis of Achievement Motivation Differences between Entrepreneurs and Managers*

    Wayne H. Stewart;Philip L. Roth

  • Missing Data in Multiple Item Scales: A Monte Carlo Analysis of Missing Data Techniques:

    Philip L. Roth;Fred S. Switzer;Deborah M. Switzer

  • ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS: A META‐ANALYSIS

    Philip L. Roth;Craig A. Bevier;Philip Bobko;Fred S. Switzer

  • DERIVATION AND IMPLICATIONS OF A META‐ANALYTIC MATRIX INCORPORATING COGNITIVE ABILITY, ALTERNATIVE PREDICTORS, AND JOB PERFORMANCE

    Philip Bobko;Philip L. Roth;Denise Potosky

  • Response Rates in HRM/OB Survey Research: Norms and Correlates, 1990-1994

    Philip L. Roth;Craig A. BeVier

  • Meta-analyzing the relationship between grades and job performance.

    Philip L. Roth;Craig A. BeVier;Fred S. Switzer Iii;Jeffery S. Schippmann

  • Social Media in Employee-Selection-Related Decisions A Research Agenda for Uncharted Territory

    Philip L. Roth;Philip Bobko;Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Jason Bennett Thatcher

  • Racial Group Differences in Employment Interview Evaluations

    Allen I. Huffcutt;Philip L. Roth

  • Are you interested? A meta-analysis of relations between vocational interests and employee performance and turnover.

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Philip L. Roth;Dan J. Putka;Stephen E. Lanivich

  • Social Media for Selection? Validity and Adverse Impact Potential of a Facebook-Based Assessment

    Chad H. Van Iddekinge;Stephen E. Lanivich;Philip L. Roth;Elliott Junco

  • A meta-analytic investigation of cognitive ability in employment interview evaluations: Moderating characteristics and implications for incremental validity.

    Allen I. Huffcutt;Philip L. Roth;Michael A. McDaniel

  • A Meta-Analysis of Gender Group Differences for Measures of Job Performance in Field Studies

    Philip L. Roth;Kristen L. Purvis;Philip Bobko

  • Exploring the theoretical foundations of playfulness in computer interactions

    Philip L. Roth;Philip L. Roth;Philip L. Roth;Amy B. Woszczynski;Amy B. Woszczynski;Amy B. Woszczynski

  • The Usefulness of Unit Weights in Creating Composite Scores A Literature Review, Application to Content Validity, and Meta-Analysis

    Philip Bobko;Philip L. Roth;Maury A. Buster

Frequent Co-Authors

Chad H. Van Iddekinge
Chad H. Van Iddekinge Florida State University
Philip Bobko
Philip Bobko Gettysburg College
Jason Bennett Thatcher
Jason Bennett Thatcher University of Colorado Boulder
In-Sue Oh
In-Sue Oh Temple University
Steven B. Robbins
Steven B. Robbins Virginia Commonwealth University
Filip Lievens
Filip Lievens Singapore Management University
Michael A. McDaniel
Michael A. McDaniel Virginia Commonwealth University
Karla K. Stuebing
Karla K. Stuebing University of Houston
David A. Harrison
David A. Harrison The University of Texas at Austin
Janet L. Barnes-Farrell
Janet L. Barnes-Farrell University of Connecticut

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 opens doors to diverse career opportunities, from clinical counseling to research and education. Online degree options have made it easier than ever for students across the U.S. to achieve their academic and career goals in this field, with many programs offering flexible schedules and affordable tuition.

When choosing the right program, consider value and accreditation. Resources like the best value counseling degrees in Texas or the most valuable counseling degrees in Wisconsin can be valuable guides for comparing options.

Interested in online graduate study? The most valuable counseling master's programs in Florida and the best value counseling master's degrees in the South highlight reputable programs offering strong outcomes for students. Careful research, combined with these resources, can help you select a pathway that aligns with your professional ambitions in psychology and counseling.

Best Scientists Citing Philip L. Roth

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles