World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
34
Citations
6026
World Ranking
12051
National Ranking
226

Slinger Jansen 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 Slinger Jansen 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: 241 publications — 60th percentile

60% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Slinger Jansen 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 Slinger Jansen 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: 34 D-Index — 16th percentile

16% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Slinger Jansen is affiliated with Utrecht University in the Netherlands and specializes in research primarily within the field of Computer Science. Their body of work covers various subfields including Information Systems, Artificial Intelligence, Management Information Systems, Computer Science Applications, and Strategy and Management.

Their research spans multiple topical areas, reflecting a diverse focus in software and digital technologies. Key topics in Jansen's work include Software Engineering Research, Software Engineering Techniques and Practices, Blockchain Technology Applications and Security, Open Source Software Innovations, Digital Platforms and Economics, Scientific Computing and Data Management, and Software System Performance and Reliability.

Jansen has contributed to a number of recent papers, demonstrating involvement in contemporary issues such as blockchain platform selection, decentralized autonomous organizations, and the intersection of physical activity and quality of life in medical research contexts. Notable publications include:

  • Decision Support for Blockchain Platform Selection: Three Industry Case Studies, 2020, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management
  • Defining Blockchain Governance: A Framework for Analysis and Comparison, 2020, Information Systems Management
  • Longitudinal associations of light-intensity physical activity with quality of life, functioning and fatigue after colorectal cancer, 2020, Quality of Life Research
  • A decision model for decentralized autonomous organization platform selection: Three industry case studies, 2023, Blockchain Research and Applications
  • A decision model for programming language ecosystem selection: Seven industry case studies, 2021, Information and Software Technology

The scientist frequently collaborates with a group of co-authors, highlighting interdisciplinary and multi-author research efforts. Frequent collaborators include Paul van Vulpen, Siamak Farshidi, Michiel Overeem, and Fang Hou.

Jansen's work appears in various publication venues, several of which are multidisciplinary and open-access platforms. These include:

  • SSRN Electronic Journal
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
  • Blockchain Research and Applications
  • Information and Software Technology

The research output indicates a strong emphasis on software engineering and blockchain applications, often integrating management frameworks and decision models. The accumulation of citations on the highlighted papers suggests a degree of engagement and recognition within the academic community, particularly in the contexts of blockchain governance and platform selection methodologies.

Best Publications

  • A sense of community: A research agenda for software ecosystems

    Slinger Jansen;Anthony Finkelstein;Sjaak Brinkkemper

  • The agile requirements refinery: Applying SCRUM principles to software product management

    Kevin Vlaanderen;Slinger Jansen;Sjaak Brinkkemper;Erik Jaspers

  • Business Network Management as a Survival Strategy: A Tale of Two Software Ecosystems

    Slinger Jansen;Sjaak Brinkkemper;Anthony Finkelstein

  • How education, stimulation, and incubation encourage student entrepreneurship: Observations from MIT, IIIT, and Utrecht University

    Slinger Jansen;Tommy van de Zande;Sjaak Brinkkemper;Erik Stam

  • Software Ecosystems: Analyzing and Managing Business Networks in the Software Industry

    Slinger Jansen;Sjaak Brinkkemper;Michael A. Cusumano

  • Measuring the health of open source software ecosystems: Beyond the scope of project health

    Slinger Jansen

  • Formalizing software ecosystem modeling

    Vasilis Boucharas;Slinger Jansen;Sjaak Brinkkemper

  • Decision Support for Blockchain Platform Selection: Three Industry Case Studies

    Siamak Farshidi;Slinger Jansen;Sergio Espana;Jacco Verkleij

  • Defining software ecosystems: a survey of software platforms and business network governance

    Slinger Jansen;Michael A. Cusumano

  • Software ecosystems: a software ecosystem strategy assessment model

    Ivo van den Berk;Slinger Jansen;Lútzen Luinenburg

  • Defining Blockchain Governance: A Framework for Analysis and Comparison

    Rowan van Pelt;Slinger Jansen;Djuri Baars;Sietse Overbeek

  • Shades of gray: Opening up a software producing organization with the open software enterprise model

    Slinger Jansen;Sjaak Brinkkemper;Jurriaan Souer;Lutzen Luinenburg

  • Evaluating architectural openness in mobile software platforms

    Mohsen Anvaari;Slinger Jansen

  • Defining App Stores: The Role of Curated Marketplaces in Software Ecosystems

    Slinger Jansen;Ewoud Bloemendal

  • How do professionals perceive legacy systems and software modernization

    Ravi Khadka;Belfrit V. Batlajery;Amir M. Saeidi;Slinger Jansen

  • The Contribution of Enterprise Architecture to the Achievement of Organizational Goals: A Review of the Evidence

    Vasilis Boucharas;Marlies van Steenbergen;Slinger Jansen;Sjaak Brinkkemper

  • Legacy to SOA Evolution: A Systematic Literature Review

    Ravi Khadka;Amir Saeidi;Andrei Idu;Jurriaan Hage

  • Pragmatic and Opportunistic Reuse in Innovative Start-up Companies

    S. Jansen;S. Brinkkemper;I. Hunink;C. Demir

  • A focus area maturity model for software ecosystem governance

    Slinger Jansen

  • A systematic mapping study on software ecosystems from a three-dimensional perspective

    Olavo Barbosa;Rodrigo Pereira dos Santos;Carina Alves;Claudia Werner

  • Steering Insight: An Exploration of the Ruby Software Ecosystem

    Jaap Kabbedijk;Slinger Jansen

Frequent Co-Authors

Sjaak Brinkkemper
Sjaak Brinkkemper Utrecht University
Anthony Finkelstein
Anthony Finkelstein University College London
Jan Bosch
Jan Bosch Chalmers University of Technology
Joost Visser
Joost Visser Leiden University
Marten van Sinderen
Marten van Sinderen University of Twente
Kari Smolander
Kari Smolander Lappeenranta University of Technology
Geert-Jan Houben
Geert-Jan Houben Delft University of Technology
Tom Mens
Tom Mens University of Mons
André van der Hoek
André van der Hoek University of California, Irvine

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 doesn’t have to follow a traditional path. Many students start or advance their careers by enrolling in flexible online programs. Today’s popular online colleges deliver quality computer science and tech degrees with the same rigor as on-campus offerings.

If you have a specific area of interest, online degrees offer targeted learning. For example, an online game development degree can prepare you for a creative career building interactive experiences. Meanwhile, those interested in digital safety can pursue the cheapest cybersecurity degree programs, opening doors to roles in information security and risk management.

Computer science skills are also highly sought after in fields beyond tech. The cheapest construction management degree programs now often integrate data analytics, project management software, and automation—skills that overlap with computer science training.

With a range of affordable online options, students can build a customized education and career pathway that fits their goals and budget.

Best Scientists Citing Slinger Jansen

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles