World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
39
Citations
6525
World Ranking
9763
National Ranking
4119

Shaowen Bardzell publication distribution in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Computer Science in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Shaowen Bardzell sits on this spectrum.

32–41 publications: 7 scientists 42–51 publications: 22 scientists 52–61 publications: 82 scientists 62–71 publications: 134 scientists 72–81 publications: 249 scientists 82–91 publications: 324 scientists 92–101 publications: 421 scientists 102–111 publications: 420 scientists 112–121 publications: 497 scientists 122–131 publications: 544 scientists 132–141 publications: 555 scientists 142–151 publications: 609 scientists 152–161 publications: 559 scientists 162–171 publications: 534 scientists 172–181 publications: 556 scientists 182–191 publications: 583 scientists 192–201 publications: 519 scientists 202–211 publications: 508 scientists 212–221 publications: 490 scientists 222–231 publications: 437 scientists 232–241 publications: 423 scientists 242–251 publications: 408 scientists 252–261 publications: 377 scientists 262–271 publications: 301 scientists 272–281 publications: 335 scientists 282–291 publications: 320 scientists 292–301 publications: 293 scientists 302–311 publications: 250 scientists 312–321 publications: 238 scientists 322–331 publications: 206 scientists 332–341 publications: 209 scientists 342–351 publications: 208 scientists 352–361 publications: 162 scientists 362–371 publications: 176 scientists 372–381 publications: 127 scientists 382–391 publications: 158 scientists 392–401 publications: 128 scientists 402–411 publications: 104 scientists 412–421 publications: 94 scientists 422–431 publications: 99 scientists 432–441 publications: 83 scientists 442–451 publications: 108 scientists 452–461 publications: 73 scientists 462–471 publications: 77 scientists 472–481 publications: 69 scientists 482–491 publications: 84 scientists 492–501 publications: 62 scientists 502–511 publications: 54 scientists 512–521 publications: 57 scientists 522–531 publications: 51 scientists 532–541 publications: 51 scientists 542–551 publications: 32 scientists 552–561 publications: 38 scientists 562–571 publications: 28 scientists 572–581 publications: 43 scientists 582–591 publications: 33 scientists 592–601 publications: 41 scientists 602–611 publications: 32 scientists 612–621 publications: 28 scientists 622–631 publications: 25 scientists 632–641 publications: 27 scientists 642–651 publications: 17 scientists 652–661 publications: 20 scientists 662–671 publications: 17 scientists 672–681 publications: 15 scientists 682–691 publications: 14 scientists 692–701 publications: 21 scientists 702–711 publications: 13 scientists 712–721 publications: 12 scientists 722–731 publications: 19 scientists 732–741 publications: 14 scientists 742–751 publications: 12 scientists 752–761 publications: 10 scientists 762–771 publications: 10 scientists 772–781 publications: 11 scientists 782–791 publications: 10 scientists 792–801 publications: 11 scientists 802–811 publications: 8 scientists 812–821 publications: 8 scientists 822–831 publications: 7 scientists 832–841 publications: 11 scientists 842–851 publications: 10 scientists 852–861 publications: 5 scientists 862–871 publications: 9 scientists 872–881 publications: 4 scientists 882–891 publications: 6 scientists 892–901 publications: 3 scientists 902–911 publications: 6 scientists 912–921 publications: 3 scientists 922–931 publications: 2 scientists 932–941 publications: 2 scientists 942–951 publications: 2 scientists 952–961 publications: 3 scientists 962–971 publications: 3 scientists 972–981 publications: 3 scientists 982–990 publications: 5 scientists 991+ publications: 100 scientists
32 publications 991+

This scientist: 153 publications — 28th percentile

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

The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more.

Shaowen Bardzell D-index placement in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Computer Science scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Shaowen Bardzell sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 879 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 983 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 918 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 990 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 968 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 907 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 821 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 763 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 689 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 543 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 543 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 518 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 500 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 458 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 400 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 337 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 308 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 292 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 249 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 213 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 192 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 189 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 165 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 139 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 119 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 121 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 113 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 88 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 87 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 75 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 69 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 57 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 46 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 38 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 34 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 36 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 27 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 37 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 18 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 31 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 19 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 16 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 20 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 15 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 5 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 20 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 8 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 5 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 7 scientists 130 D-Index: 3 scientists 131+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 39 D-Index — 33rd percentile

33% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more.

Overview

Shaowen Bardzell is affiliated with the Georgia Institute of Technology in the United States. Their research mainly focuses on computer science, with significant contributions to the subfield of human-computer interaction. Bardzell's work spans various interdisciplinary areas including sociology and political science, clinical psychology, and electrical and electronic engineering.

The scientist has explored multiple topics within innovative human-technology interaction, digital games and media, mobile crowdsensing and crowdsourcing, open source software innovations, persona design and applications, technology use by older adults, and child development related to digital technology.

Shaowen Bardzell's recent publications include the following:

  • The Menstruating Entrepreneur Kickstarting a New Politics of Women's Health, 2020, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction
  • Alternatives to Agrilogistics: Designing for Ecological Thinking, 2021, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • "Pro-Amateur"-Driven Technological Innovation, 2020, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
  • Announcing a new CHI subcommittee, 2020, interactions
  • Mitigating Exploitation, 2020, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

Frequent collaborators in Bardzell's research include Jeffrey Bardzell, Naomi Yamashita, Nicola J. Bidwell, Neha Kumar, and Helena M. Mentis.

The scientist publishes regularly in leading venues such as Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts, interactions, Designing Interactive Systems Conference, and ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction.

Best Publications

  • Feminist HCI: taking stock and outlining an agenda for design

    Shaowen Bardzell

  • What is "critical" about critical design?

    Jeffrey Bardzell;Shaowen Bardzell

  • Towards a feminist HCI methodology: social science, feminism, and HCI

    Shaowen Bardzell;Jeffrey Bardzell

  • Critical design and critical theory: the challenge of designing for provocation

    Shaowen Bardzell;Jeffrey Bardzell;Jodi Forlizzi;John Zimmerman

  • An assessment of body appreciation and its relationship to sexual function in women

    Sonya Satinsky;Michael Reece;Barbara Dennis;Stephanie Sanders

  • Reconstituting the Utopian Vision of Making: HCI After Technosolutionism

    Silvia Lindtner;Shaowen Bardzell;Jeffrey Bardzell

  • The Proper Care and Feeding of Hackerspaces: Care Ethics and Cultures of Making

    Austin L. Toombs;Shaowen Bardzell;Jeffrey Bardzell

  • Designing for Cohabitation: Naturecultures, Hybrids, and Decentering the Human in Design

    Nancy Smith;Shaowen Bardzell;Jeffrey Bardzell

  • Immodest Proposals: Research Through Design and Knowledge

    Jeffrey Bardzell;Shaowen Bardzell;Lone Koefoed Hansen

  • Humanistic HCI

    Jeffrey Bardzell;Shaowen Bardzell

  • Making cultures: empowerment, participation, and democracy - or not?

    Morgan G. Ames;Jeffrey Bardzell;Shaowen Bardzell;Silvia Lindtner

  • Pleasure is your birthright: digitally enabled designer sex toys as a case of third-wave HCI

    Jeffrey Bardzell;Shaowen Bardzell

  • Sustainable Making? Balancing Optimism and Criticism in HCI Discourse

    David Roedl;Shaowen Bardzell;Jeffrey Bardzell

  • The Experience of Embodied Space in Virtual Worlds: An Ethnography of a Second Life Community

    Shaowen Bardzell;William Odom

  • Reading critical designs: supporting reasoned interpretations of critical design

    Jeffrey Bardzell;Shaowen Bardzell;Erik Stolterman

  • Becoming Makers: Hackerspace Member Habits, Values, and Identities

    A Toombs;S Bardzell;J Bardzell

  • Crafting quality in design: integrity, creativity, and public sensibility

    Shaowen Bardzell;Daniela K. Rosner;Jeffrey Bardzell

  • How HCI talks about sexuality: discursive strategies, blind spots, and opportunities for future research

    Gopinaath Kannabiran;Jeffrey Bardzell;Shaowen Bardzell

  • Watching Myself Watching Birds: Abjection, Ecological Thinking, and Posthuman Design

    Heidi R. Biggs;Jeffrey Bardzell;Shaowen Bardzell

  • The rogue in the lovely black dress: intimacy in world of warcraft

    Tyler Pace;Shaowen Bardzell;Jeffrey Bardzell

  • Structures, forms, and stuff: the materiality and medium of interaction

    Shad Gross;Jeffrey Bardzell;Shaowen Bardzell

  • Documenting the Research Through Design Process

    Jeffrey Bardzell;Shaowen Bardzell;Peter Dalsgaard;Shad Gross

  • Utopias of Participation: Feminism, Design, and the Futures

    Shaowen Bardzell

  • Symbiotic Encounters: HCI and Sustainable Agriculture

    Szu-Yu (Cyn) Liu;Shaowen Bardzell;Jeffrey Bardzell

Frequent Co-Authors

Jeffrey Bardzell
Jeffrey Bardzell Pennsylvania State University
Kim Halskov
Kim Halskov Aarhus University
Elizabeth F. Churchill
Elizabeth F. Churchill Google (United States)
Mark Blythe
Mark Blythe Northumbria University
Margaret Burnett
Margaret Burnett Oregon State University
Carl DiSalvo
Carl DiSalvo Georgia Institute of Technology
Amanda Lazar
Amanda Lazar University of California, San Diego
Erik Stolterman
Erik Stolterman Indiana University
Michael Reece
Michael Reece Indiana University
Stephanie A. Sanders
Stephanie A. Sanders Indiana 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 computer science opens doors to a range of educational options and lucrative careers. Many students start with online associate degree programs, providing foundational skills and a quick entry into the tech industry.

For those seeking to bolster their resumes fast, there are short certificate programs that pay well, offering practical credentials and increased earning potential within months. These are ideal for those wanting targeted skills or a career pivot.

If you’re looking to advance your education and career standing in less time, consider the quickest masters degree online options. These accelerated programs let professionals upskill without a lengthy time commitment.

When considering an advanced degree, it’s wise to research graduate degrees that are worth it. Computer science, data science, and engineering consistently rank among the most valuable programs with strong job outlooks and high salaries.

Best Scientists Citing Shaowen Bardzell

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles