World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Scott O. Lilienfeld

Scott O. Lilienfeld

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
107
Citations
42821
World Ranking
450
National Ranking
291

Scott O. Lilienfeld 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 Scott O. Lilienfeld 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: 554 publications — 98th percentile

98% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Scott O. Lilienfeld 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 Scott O. Lilienfeld 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: 107 D-Index — 96th percentile

96% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2013 - James McKeen Cattell Fellow Award, Association for Psychological Science

Overview

Scott O. Lilienfeld was affiliated with Emory University in the United States. Their research spanned multiple facets within psychology and social sciences, with a particular focus on clinical psychology, sociology and political science, and social psychology. Their work also intersected with cognitive neuroscience and psychiatry and mental health.

The scientist contributed extensively to several main topics of psychological research. These included social and intergroup psychology, psychopathy and forensic psychiatry with sexual offending, psychology of moral and emotional judgment, psychosomatic disorders and their treatments, personality disorders and psychopathology, cultural differences and values, and misinformation and its impacts.

Throughout their career, Lilienfeld collaborated frequently with several co-authors. These included Bethany A. Teachman, Douglas A. Bernstein, Bunmi O. Olatunji, Thomas H. Costello, and Shauna M. Bowes. These collaborations resulted in a range of publications across a variety of venues.

Some of the notable recent papers associated with these collaborations and authorship were:

  • "Clarifying the structure and nature of left-wing authoritarianism." (2021), Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
  • "Psychological measurement and the replication crisis: Four sacred cows." (2020), Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne
  • "Looking under the tinfoil hat: Clarifying the personological and psychopathological correlates of conspiracy beliefs." (2020), Journal of Personality
  • "Cognitive biases, heuristics, and logical fallacies in clinical practice: A brief field guide for practicing clinicians and supervisors." (2020), Professional Psychology Research and Practice
  • "Dissociation and Dissociative Disorders Reconsidered: Beyond Sociocognitive and Trauma Models Toward a Transtheoretical Framework." (2022), Annual Review of Clinical Psychology

Frequent publication venues included PsycTESTS Dataset, Professional Psychology Research and Practice, Journal of Research in Personality, Clinical Psychology Science and Practice, and Journal of Experimental Psychology General.

Lilienfeld's contributions extended to book publications through Cambridge University Press, where two notable works were published in 2020: "The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Disorders" and "Introduction to Clinical Psychology."

In recognition of their contributions to the field, Lilienfeld received the James McKeen Cattell Fellow Award from the Association for Psychological Science in 2013.

Best Publications

  • Development and preliminary validation of a self-report measure of psychopathic personality traits in noncriminal populations.

    Scott O. Lilienfeld;Brian P. Andrews

  • A meta-analytic review of the relation between antisocial behavior and neuropsychological measures of executive function.

    Alex B. Morgan;Scott O. Lilienfeld

  • Psychological Treatments That Cause Harm

    Scott O. Lilienfeld

  • The Scientific Status of Projective Techniques

    Scott O. Lilienfeld;James M. Wood;Howard N. Garb

  • Psychopathic Personality Bridging the Gap Between Scientific Evidence and Public Policy

    Jennifer L. Skeem;Devon L. L. Polaschek;Christopher J. Patrick;Scott O. Lilienfeld

  • Psychopathic, not psychopath: taxometric evidence for the dimensional structure of psychopathy.

    John F. Edens;David K. Marcus;Scott O. Lilienfeld;Norman G. Poythress Jr.

  • The association between anxiety and psychopathy dimensions in children

    Paul J. Frick;Scott O. Lilienfeld;Mesha Ellis;Brian Loney

  • Conceptual problems in the assessment of psychopathy

    Scott O. Lilienfeld

  • Psychopathic personality or personalities? Exploring potential variants of psychopathy and their implications for risk assessment

    Jennifer L Skeem;Norman Poythress;John F Edens;Scott O Lilienfeld

  • The self‑report assessment of psychopathy: Challenges, pitfalls, and promises.

    Martin Sellbom;Scott O. Lilienfeld;Katherine A. Fowler;Kristen L. McCrary

  • Parsing the heterogeneity of impulsivity: A meta-analytic review of the behavioral implications of the UPPS for psychopathology.

    Joanna M. Berg;Robert D. Latzman;Nancy G. Bliwise;Scott O. Lilienfeld

  • Sex differences in psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder. A review and integration.

    Ellison M. Cale;Scott O. Lilienfeld

  • Differences between trait fear and trait anxiety: Implications for psychopathology

    Patrick Sylvers;Scott O. Lilienfeld;Jamie L. LaPrairie

  • Neural correlates of social cooperation and non-cooperation as a function of psychopathy.

    James K. Rilling;Andrea L. Glenn;Meeta R. Jairam;Giuseppe Pagnoni

  • 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering Widespread Misconceptions about Human Behavior

    Scott O. Lilienfeld

  • Giving Debiasing Away: Can Psychological Research on Correcting Cognitive Errors Promote Human Welfare?

    Scott O. Lilienfeld;Rachel Ammirati;Kristin Landfield

  • Brainwashed: The Seductive Appeal of Mindless Neuroscience

    Sally L. Satel;Scott O. Lilienfeld

  • Why many clinical psychologists are resistant to evidence-based practice: Root causes and constructive remedies☆

    Scott O. Lilienfeld;Lorie A. Ritschel;Steven Jay Lynn;Robin L. Cautin

  • The role of fearless dominance in psychopathy: confusions, controversies, and clarifications.

    Scott O. Lilienfeld;Christopher J. Patrick;Stephen D. Benning;Joanna Berg

  • A Critical Examination of the Use of the Term and Concept of Comorbidity in Psychopathology Research

    Scott O. Lilienfeld;Irwin D. Waldman;Allen C. Israel

Frequent Co-Authors

Hal Arkowitz
Hal Arkowitz University of Arizona
Steven Jay Lynn
Steven Jay Lynn Binghamton University
Ashley L. Watts
Ashley L. Watts Vanderbilt University
John F. Edens
John F. Edens Texas A&M University
Robert D. Latzman
Robert D. Latzman Georgia State University
Christopher J. Patrick
Christopher J. Patrick Florida State University
Jennifer L. Skeem
Jennifer L. Skeem University of California, Berkeley
Kevin S. Douglas
Kevin S. Douglas Simon Fraser University
James M. Wood
James M. Wood The University of Texas at El Paso
Howard N. Garb
Howard N. Garb United States Army Research Laboratory

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 online degrees in psychology can open numerous pathways, especially for those aiming to become licensed professional counselors (LPCs). Each state in the U.S. has its own set of educational and licensure requirements, so it’s essential to research your intended location before enrolling in a program.

For instance, individuals interested in working in North Dakota should review the North Dakota lpc licensure requirements. Similarly, understanding the Ohio licensed professional counselor requirements is crucial if you plan to practice in Ohio.

The steps on how to get an lpc license in Oklahoma illustrate the commonalities and differences across states. Meanwhile, the Oregon lpc licensure requirements highlight the value of choosing accredited online programs that meet state standards.

By researching state-specific pathways and selecting the right online degree, you can prepare for a successful career in counseling or related psychology fields—no matter where you plan to practice.

Best Scientists Citing Scott O. Lilienfeld

Recently Published Articles