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
Social Sciences and Humanities 41 5017 4651 2369 2156 143 7768

Thomas Hugh Feeley publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Thomas Hugh Feeley between 1995 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Thomas Hugh Feeley published across 31 years, from 1995 to 2025, averaging 5.1 papers a year. Output peaked at 11 publications in 2009. 13 of the 158 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
2 4 6 8 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1995 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 11. Peak 11 publications in 2009. 1995: 2 publications 1996: 1 publication 1997: 4 publications 1998: 2 publications 1999: 0 publications 2000: 2 publications 2001: 0 publications 2002: 2 publications 2003: 4 publications 2004: 3 publications 2005: 3 publications 2006: 2 publications 2007: 5 publications 2008: 6 publications 2009: 11 publications 2010: 11 publications 2011: 10 publications 2012: 6 publications 2013: 2 publications 2014: 10 publications 2015: 5 publications 2016: 9 publications 2017: 6 publications 2018: 3 publications 2019: 6 publications 2020: 9 publications 2021: 10 publications 2022: 8 publications 2023: 3 publications 2024: 4 publications 2025: 9 publications
1995 2025

158 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Thomas Hugh Feeley: publications per year, 1995 to 2025
Year Publications
1995 2
1996 1
1997 4
1998 2
1999 0
2000 2
2001 0
2002 2
2003 4
2004 3
2005 3
2006 2
2007 5
2008 6
2009 11
2010 11
2011 10
2012 6
2013 2
2014 10
2015 5
2016 9
2017 6
2018 3
2019 6
2020 9
2021 10
2022 8
2023 3
2024 4
2025 9
Total 158
Download as CSV

Thomas Hugh Feeley publication distribution in Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Thomas Hugh Feeley sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300 400
Bar chart with 54 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 44–53 to 570+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 474. Most scientists, 474, have 114–123 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 570 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 134–143 publications, is where this scientist sits. 44–53 publications: 28 scientists 54–63 publications: 61 scientists 64–73 publications: 161 scientists 74–83 publications: 225 scientists 84–93 publications: 301 scientists 94–103 publications: 390 scientists 104–113 publications: 406 scientists 114–123 publications: 474 scientists 124–133 publications: 453 scientists 134–143 publications: 434 scientists 144–153 publications: 407 scientists 154–163 publications: 411 scientists 164–173 publications: 391 scientists 174–183 publications: 313 scientists 184–193 publications: 319 scientists 194–203 publications: 304 scientists 204–213 publications: 285 scientists 214–223 publications: 246 scientists 224–233 publications: 213 scientists 234–243 publications: 170 scientists 244–253 publications: 167 scientists 254–263 publications: 162 scientists 264–273 publications: 138 scientists 274–283 publications: 138 scientists 284–293 publications: 113 scientists 294–303 publications: 106 scientists 304–313 publications: 95 scientists 314–323 publications: 101 scientists 324–333 publications: 81 scientists 334–343 publications: 69 scientists 344–353 publications: 56 scientists 354–363 publications: 36 scientists 364–373 publications: 42 scientists 374–383 publications: 41 scientists 384–393 publications: 44 scientists 394–403 publications: 27 scientists 404–413 publications: 30 scientists 414–423 publications: 20 scientists 424–433 publications: 29 scientists 434–443 publications: 29 scientists 444–453 publications: 25 scientists 454–463 publications: 19 scientists 464–473 publications: 21 scientists 474–483 publications: 11 scientists 484–493 publications: 17 scientists 494–503 publications: 7 scientists 504–513 publications: 6 scientists 514–523 publications: 12 scientists 524–533 publications: 10 scientists 534–543 publications: 7 scientists 544–553 publications: 6 scientists 554–563 publications: 12 scientists 564–569 publications: 8 scientists 570+ publications: 100 scientists
44–53 publications 570+

This scientist: 143 publications — 38th percentile

38% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 570 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 7,777 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
44–53 28
54–63 61
64–73 161
74–83 225
84–93 301
94–103 390
104–113 406
114–123 474
124–133 453
134–143 434 143
144–153 407
154–163 411
164–173 391
174–183 313
184–193 319
194–203 304
204–213 285
214–223 246
224–233 213
234–243 170
244–253 167
254–263 162
264–273 138
274–283 138
284–293 113
294–303 106
304–313 95
314–323 101
324–333 81
334–343 69
344–353 56
354–363 36
364–373 42
374–383 41
384–393 44
394–403 27
404–413 30
414–423 20
424–433 29
434–443 29
444–453 25
454–463 19
464–473 21
474–483 11
484–493 17
494–503 7
504–513 6
514–523 12
524–533 10
534–543 7
544–553 6
554–563 12
564–569 8
570+ 100
Download as CSV

Thomas Hugh Feeley D-index placement in Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Thomas Hugh Feeley sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300
Bar chart with 71 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30 to 100+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 313. Most scientists, 313, have 42 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 100 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 41 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 30 D-Index: 177 scientists 31 D-Index: 210 scientists 32 D-Index: 222 scientists 33 D-Index: 188 scientists 34 D-Index: 181 scientists 35 D-Index: 243 scientists 36 D-Index: 261 scientists 37 D-Index: 272 scientists 38 D-Index: 278 scientists 39 D-Index: 300 scientists 40 D-Index: 297 scientists 41 D-Index: 308 scientists 42 D-Index: 313 scientists 43 D-Index: 300 scientists 44 D-Index: 269 scientists 45 D-Index: 260 scientists 46 D-Index: 228 scientists 47 D-Index: 251 scientists 48 D-Index: 203 scientists 49 D-Index: 186 scientists 50 D-Index: 187 scientists 51 D-Index: 166 scientists 52 D-Index: 138 scientists 53 D-Index: 141 scientists 54 D-Index: 131 scientists 55 D-Index: 137 scientists 56 D-Index: 109 scientists 57 D-Index: 129 scientists 58 D-Index: 95 scientists 59 D-Index: 105 scientists 60 D-Index: 106 scientists 61 D-Index: 86 scientists 62 D-Index: 94 scientists 63 D-Index: 77 scientists 64 D-Index: 79 scientists 65 D-Index: 59 scientists 66 D-Index: 68 scientists 67 D-Index: 51 scientists 68 D-Index: 49 scientists 69 D-Index: 40 scientists 70 D-Index: 43 scientists 71 D-Index: 40 scientists 72 D-Index: 50 scientists 73 D-Index: 46 scientists 74 D-Index: 43 scientists 75 D-Index: 45 scientists 76 D-Index: 45 scientists 77 D-Index: 30 scientists 78 D-Index: 25 scientists 79 D-Index: 31 scientists 80 D-Index: 29 scientists 81 D-Index: 18 scientists 82 D-Index: 21 scientists 83 D-Index: 26 scientists 84 D-Index: 15 scientists 85 D-Index: 15 scientists 86 D-Index: 19 scientists 87 D-Index: 19 scientists 88 D-Index: 12 scientists 89 D-Index: 7 scientists 90 D-Index: 19 scientists 91 D-Index: 20 scientists 92 D-Index: 13 scientists 93 D-Index: 9 scientists 94 D-Index: 13 scientists 95 D-Index: 8 scientists 96 D-Index: 7 scientists 97 D-Index: 6 scientists 98 D-Index: 6 scientists 99 D-Index: 6 scientists 100+ D-Index: 97 scientists
30 D-Index 100+

This scientist: 41 D-Index — 38th percentile

38% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 100 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 7,777 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30 177
31 210
32 222
33 188
34 181
35 243
36 261
37 272
38 278
39 300
40 297
41 308 41
42 313
43 300
44 269
45 260
46 228
47 251
48 203
49 186
50 187
51 166
52 138
53 141
54 131
55 137
56 109
57 129
58 95
59 105
60 106
61 86
62 94
63 77
64 79
65 59
66 68
67 51
68 49
69 40
70 43
71 40
72 50
73 46
74 43
75 45
76 45
77 30
78 25
79 31
80 29
81 18
82 21
83 26
84 15
85 15
86 19
87 19
88 12
89 7
90 19
91 20
92 13
93 9
94 13
95 8
96 7
97 6
98 6
99 6
100+ 97
Download as CSV

Overview

Thomas Hugh Feeley is affiliated with the University at Buffalo, State University of New York in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on the fields of Medicine, with notable contributions to Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, General Health Professions, Transplantation, Sociology and Political Science, and Communication.

Their work encompasses a range of topics, including:

  • Organ Donation and Transplantation
  • Renal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
  • Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Reproductive Health and Technologies

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Feeley include:

  • Liise K. Kayler
  • Maria Keller
  • Renée Cadzow
  • Beth Dolph
  • Molly Ranahan

Their research has appeared in various publication venues, with the greatest number of works published in:

  • Progress in Transplantation
  • Clinical Transplantation
  • American Journal of Transplantation
  • Health Communication
  • Transplantation Direct

Selected recent papers include:

  • Using Animated Videos to Increase Patient Knowledge: A Meta-Analytic Review (2022), published in Health Education & Behavior
  • Development of the living donation and kidney transplantation information made easy (KidneyTIME) educational animations (2020), published in Clinical Transplantation
  • Ceiling effects indicate a possible threshold structure for working alliance (2021), published in Journal of Counseling Psychology
  • Reduced Risk Information Seeking Model (RISK): A Meta-Analysis (2022), published in Science Communication
  • Assessing Study Quality in Meta-Analysis (2020), published in Human Communication Research

Best Publications

  • Social support, social strain, loneliness, and well-being among older adults: An analysis of the Health and Retirement Study *

    Yixin Chen;Thomas Hugh Feeley

  • Health information seeking: a review of measures and methods.

    Ashley E. Anker;Amber Marie Reinhart;Thomas Hugh Feeley

  • Risk Information Seeking and Processing Model: A Meta-Analysis

    Z. Janet Yang;Ariel M. Aloe;Thomas Hugh Feeley

  • The Persuasive Effects of Message Framing in Organ Donation: The Mediating Role of Psychological Reactance

    Amber Marie Reinhart;Heather M. Marshall;Thomas Hugh Feeley;Frank Tutzauer

  • To Catch a Liar: Challenges for Research in Lie Detection Training

    Mark G. Frank;Thomas Hugh Feeley

  • Patient Internet Use for Health Information at Three Urban Primary Care Clinics

    Suzanne Dickerson;Amber M. Reinhart;Thomas Hugh Feeley;Rakesh Bidani

  • Measurement of the bystander intervention model for bullying and sexual harassment

    Amanda B. Nickerson;Ariel M. Aloe;Jennifer A. Livingston;Thomas Hugh Feeley

  • Predicting Employee Turnover from Friendship Networks

    Thomas Hugh Feeley;Jennie Hwang;George A. Barnett

  • Predicting Employee Turnover from Communication Networks.

    Thomas H. Feeley;George A. Barnett

  • College Students' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors Regarding Organ Donation: An Integrated Review of the Literature†

    Thomas Hugh Feeley

  • The identifiable victim effect: a meta-analytic review

    Seyoung Lee;Thomas Hugh Feeley

  • Measuring the Effectiveness of Mass-Mediated Health Campaigns Through Meta-Analysis

    Ashley E Anker;Thomas Hugh Feeley;Bonnie McCracken;Carolyn A Lagoe

  • Evidence of Halo Effects in Student Evaluations of Communication Instruction

    Thomas Hugh Feeley

  • A Bibliometric Analysis of Communication Journals from 2002 to 2005

    Thomas Hugh Feeley

  • Examining college students' intentions to become organ donors.

    Thomas Hugh Feeley;Timothy J Servoss

  • Comment on Halo Effects in Rating and Evaluation Research

    Thomas Hugh Feeley

  • A meta-analytic review of obesity prevention in the schools: 1997–2008

    Catherine Cook-Cottone;Carolyn M. Casey;Thomas Hugh Feeley;Jennifer Baran

  • The Behavioral Correlates of Sanctioned and Unsanctioned Deceptive Communication

    Thomas H. Feeley;Mark A. deTurck

  • Testing a communication network model of employee turnover based on centrality

    Thomas Hugh Feeley

  • Testing the Effects of Nonverbal Behavior Training on Accuracy in Deception Detection with the Inclusion of a Bogus Training Control Group

    Timothy R. Levine;Thomas Hugh Feeley;Steven A. McCornack;Mikayla Hughes

Frequent Co-Authors

George A. Barnett
George A. Barnett University of California, Davis
Amanda B. Nickerson
Amanda B. Nickerson State University of New York
Mark G. Frank
Mark G. Frank University at Buffalo, State University of New York
Martin R. Pollak
Martin R. Pollak Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Jennifer A. Livingston
Jennifer A. Livingston University at Buffalo, State University of New York
Kenneth P. Tercyak
Kenneth P. Tercyak Georgetown University Medical Center
Dong-Hee Shin
Dong-Hee Shin Zayed University
James W. Peltier
James W. Peltier University of Wisconsin–Whitewater
Timothy R. Levine
Timothy R. Levine University of Oklahoma
Catherine Cook-Cottone
Catherine Cook-Cottone University at Buffalo, State University of New York

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 Social Sciences and Humanities in the USA opens doors to diverse and flexible online degree options. Students interested in mental health fields may consider an online masters in psychology, which offers affordability and the qualifications needed for roles in counseling, research, or education.

For those interested in advancing within the education sector, an accelerated edd program can provide a streamlined path to educational leadership positions. Similarly, fast-track options like a masters programs online allow you to complete your advanced studies efficiently while balancing work and other responsibilities.

Undergraduates can also benefit from a accelerated bachelor's degree online accredited program. These programs help students quickly earn recognized credentials and enter the workforce sooner. With online education, students gain greater flexibility in scheduling and a broader choice of specializations to fit their personal and professional goals.

Best Scientists Citing Thomas Hugh Feeley

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles