World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Social Sciences and Humanities

D-Index
44
Citations
7929
World Ranking
4154
National Ranking
1980

Mathematics

D-Index
38
Citations
5878
World Ranking
2354
National Ranking
994

Ulf Böckenholt publication distribution in Mathematics in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Mathematics in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Ulf Böckenholt sits on this spectrum.

42–46 publications: 3 scientists 47–51 publications: 5 scientists 52–56 publications: 7 scientists 57–61 publications: 20 scientists 62–66 publications: 14 scientists 67–71 publications: 25 scientists 72–76 publications: 19 scientists 77–81 publications: 35 scientists 82–86 publications: 50 scientists 87–91 publications: 60 scientists 92–96 publications: 86 scientists 97–101 publications: 84 scientists 102–106 publications: 83 scientists 107–111 publications: 90 scientists 112–116 publications: 99 scientists 117–121 publications: 90 scientists 122–126 publications: 91 scientists 127–131 publications: 109 scientists 132–136 publications: 110 scientists 137–141 publications: 98 scientists 142–146 publications: 112 scientists 147–151 publications: 102 scientists 152–156 publications: 88 scientists 157–161 publications: 106 scientists 162–166 publications: 83 scientists 167–171 publications: 102 scientists 172–176 publications: 77 scientists 177–181 publications: 81 scientists 182–186 publications: 78 scientists 187–191 publications: 71 scientists 192–196 publications: 92 scientists 197–201 publications: 64 scientists 202–206 publications: 69 scientists 207–211 publications: 64 scientists 212–216 publications: 62 scientists 217–221 publications: 58 scientists 222–226 publications: 53 scientists 227–231 publications: 50 scientists 232–236 publications: 46 scientists 237–241 publications: 46 scientists 242–246 publications: 46 scientists 247–251 publications: 43 scientists 252–256 publications: 29 scientists 257–261 publications: 45 scientists 262–266 publications: 30 scientists 267–271 publications: 33 scientists 272–276 publications: 34 scientists 277–281 publications: 30 scientists 282–286 publications: 31 scientists 287–291 publications: 21 scientists 292–296 publications: 34 scientists 297–301 publications: 26 scientists 302–306 publications: 10 scientists 307–311 publications: 17 scientists 312–316 publications: 23 scientists 317–321 publications: 13 scientists 322–326 publications: 16 scientists 327–331 publications: 26 scientists 332–336 publications: 13 scientists 337–341 publications: 13 scientists 342–346 publications: 16 scientists 347–351 publications: 17 scientists 352–356 publications: 12 scientists 357–361 publications: 18 scientists 362–366 publications: 18 scientists 367–371 publications: 9 scientists 372–376 publications: 11 scientists 377–381 publications: 8 scientists 382–386 publications: 8 scientists 387–391 publications: 9 scientists 392–396 publications: 9 scientists 397–401 publications: 8 scientists 402–406 publications: 11 scientists 407–411 publications: 6 scientists 412–416 publications: 6 scientists 417–421 publications: 9 scientists 422–426 publications: 8 scientists 427–431 publications: 5 scientists 432–436 publications: 8 scientists 437–441 publications: 8 scientists 442–446 publications: 4 scientists 447–451 publications: 4 scientists 452–456 publications: 4 scientists 457–461 publications: 2 scientists 462–466 publications: 2 scientists 467–471 publications: 4 scientists 472–476 publications: 3 scientists 477–481 publications: 3 scientists 482–486 publications: 6 scientists 487–491 publications: 3 scientists 492–496 publications: 5 scientists 497–501 publications: 5 scientists 502–506 publications: 1 scientists 507–511 publications: 6 scientists 512–516 publications: 4 scientists 517–521 publications: 1 scientists 522–526 publications: 3 scientists 527–531 publications: 1 scientists 532–536 publications: 4 scientists 537+ publications: 100 scientists
42 publications 537+

This scientist: 123 publications — 22nd percentile

22% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 537 publications or more.

Ulf Böckenholt D-index placement in Mathematics in 2026

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

30 D-Index: 174 scientists 31 D-Index: 151 scientists 32 D-Index: 174 scientists 33 D-Index: 117 scientists 34 D-Index: 136 scientists 35 D-Index: 127 scientists 36 D-Index: 145 scientists 37 D-Index: 153 scientists 38 D-Index: 150 scientists 39 D-Index: 150 scientists 40 D-Index: 138 scientists 41 D-Index: 136 scientists 42 D-Index: 93 scientists 43 D-Index: 108 scientists 44 D-Index: 115 scientists 45 D-Index: 112 scientists 46 D-Index: 103 scientists 47 D-Index: 75 scientists 48 D-Index: 59 scientists 49 D-Index: 67 scientists 50 D-Index: 60 scientists 51 D-Index: 57 scientists 52 D-Index: 59 scientists 53 D-Index: 62 scientists 54 D-Index: 60 scientists 55 D-Index: 50 scientists 56 D-Index: 42 scientists 57 D-Index: 54 scientists 58 D-Index: 50 scientists 59 D-Index: 42 scientists 60 D-Index: 41 scientists 61 D-Index: 35 scientists 62 D-Index: 40 scientists 63 D-Index: 21 scientists 64 D-Index: 31 scientists 65 D-Index: 27 scientists 66 D-Index: 29 scientists 67 D-Index: 19 scientists 68 D-Index: 25 scientists 69 D-Index: 17 scientists 70 D-Index: 18 scientists 71 D-Index: 12 scientists 72 D-Index: 14 scientists 73 D-Index: 13 scientists 74 D-Index: 18 scientists 75 D-Index: 9 scientists 76 D-Index: 11 scientists 77 D-Index: 10 scientists 78 D-Index: 9 scientists 79 D-Index: 16 scientists 80 D-Index: 12 scientists 81 D-Index: 10 scientists 82 D-Index: 5 scientists 83 D-Index: 5 scientists 84 D-Index: 13 scientists 85 D-Index: 6 scientists 86+ D-Index: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 86+

This scientist: 38 D-Index — 37th percentile

37% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 86 D-Index or more.

Overview

Ulf Böckenholt is affiliated with Northwestern University in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on Decision Sciences, with a total of 10 publications in this field. Within this broader area, their subfields of study include Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty; Statistics and Probability; Sociology and Political Science; Economics and Econometrics; and Experimental and Cognitive Psychology.

Their main research topics cover a range of areas related to meta-analysis, measurement, and behavioral studies. These include:

  • Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
  • Mental Health Research Topics
  • Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Environmental Sustainability in Business
  • Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Economic and Environmental Valuation

Among the recent papers associated with Böckenholt's network or collaboration are the following:

  • Average Power: A Cautionary Note, 2020, Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science
  • Meta-analysis of Studies with Multiple Contrasts and Differences in Measurement Scales, 2021, Journal of Consumer Psychology
  • Intermittent faking of personality profiles in high-stakes assessments: A grade of membership analysis, 2022, Psychological Methods
  • Multilevel multivariate meta-analysis made easy: An introduction to MLMVmeta, 2022, Behavior Research Methods
  • The Enthusiasts and the Reluctants of COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake: A Cluster Analysis, 2021, Journal of the Association for Consumer Research

Böckenholt has published books under Springer International Publishing, with two editions of Quantitative Psychology released in 2020 and 2021 respectively.

They collaborate frequently with several co-authors, including Blakeley B. McShane, Karsten T. Hansen, Alexander Chernev, Sean Blair, and Marie Wiberg. Böckenholt's work appears often in these academic venues:

  • Journal of Consumer Psychology
  • Psychological Methods
  • Journal of the American Statistical Association
  • Psychometrika
  • Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science

Best Publications

  • Choice overload: A conceptual review and meta-analysis

    Alexander Chernev;Ulf Böckenholt;Joseph Goodman

  • Single-paper meta-analysis: Benefits for study summary, theory testing, and replicability.

    Blakeley B. Mcshane;Ulf Böckenholt

  • Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis: An Evaluation of Selection Methods and Some Cautionary Notes

    Blakeley B. McShane;Ulf Böckenholt;Karsten T. Hansen

  • Determinants of diagnostic hypothesis generation: effects of information, base rates, and experience.

    Elke U. Weber;Ulf Böckenholt;Denis J. Hilton;Brian Wallace

  • Modeling Multiple Response Processes in Judgment and Choice

    Ulf Böckenholt

  • Compromise and Attraction Effects under Prevention and Promotion Motivations

    Mehdi Mourali;Ulf Böckenholt;Michel Laroche

  • Discrete-Time Discrete-State Latent Markov Models with Time-Constant and Time-Varying Covariates

    Jeroen K. Vermunt;Rolf Langeheine;Ulf Bockenholt

  • Bootstrapping: applications to psychophysiology.

    Stanley Wasserman;Ulf Bockenholt

  • Social capital and core network ties: A validation study of individual-level social capital measures and their association with extra- and intra-neighborhood ties, and self-rated health

    Spencer Moore;Ulf Bockenholt;Mark Daniel;Mark Daniel;Mark Daniel;Katherine Frohlich

  • Modeling Methods for Discrete Choice Analysis

    Moshe Ben-Akiva;Daniel Mcfadden;Makoto Abe;Ulf Böckenholt

  • Solving and Testing for Regressor-Error (in)Dependence When no Instrumental Variables are Available: With New Evidence for the Effect of Education on Income

    Peter Ebbes;Michel Wedel;Ulf Böckenholt;Ton Steerneman

  • Structural equation modeling of paired-comparison and ranking data.

    Albert Maydeu-Olivares;Ulf Böckenholt

  • Measuring response styles in Likert items.

    Ulf Böckenholt

  • Process-tracing methods in decision making: on growing up in the 70s

    Michael Schulte-Mecklenbeck;Joseph G Johnson;Ulf Böckenholt;Daniel G Goldstein

  • Caveats on a process-tracing measure and a remedy

    Ulf Böckenholt;Linda S. Hynan

  • Item Randomized-Response Models for Measuring Noncompliance: Risk-Return Perceptions, Social Influences, and Self-Protective Responses

    Ulf Böckenholt;Peter G. M. van der Heijden

  • The Effects of Attractiveness, Dominance, and Attribute Differences on Information Acquisition in Multiattribute Binary Choice

    Ulf Bockenholt;Dietrich Albert;Michael Aschenbrenner;Franz Schmalhofer

  • Response style analysis with threshold and multi‐process IRT models: A review and tutorial

    Ulf Böckenholt;Thorsten Meiser

  • Regressor and random-effects dependencies in multilevel models

    Peter Ebbes;Ulf Böckenholt;Michel Wedel

  • You Cannot Step Into the Same River Twice When Power Analyses Are Optimistic

    Blakeley B. McShane;Ulf Böckenholt

Frequent Co-Authors

Michel Wedel
Michel Wedel University of Maryland, College Park
Peter G. M. van der Heijden
Peter G. M. van der Heijden University of Southampton
Mark Daniel
Mark Daniel University of Canberra
Elke U. Weber
Elke U. Weber Princeton University
Spencer Moore
Spencer Moore Wageningen University & Research
Yan Kestens
Yan Kestens University of Montreal
Laurette Dubé
Laurette Dubé McGill University
Allen W. Heinemann
Allen W. Heinemann Northwestern University
Wagner A. Kamakura
Wagner A. Kamakura Rice University
Lise Gauvin
Lise Gauvin University of Montreal

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

Studying Mathematics in the USA opens doors to diverse online degrees and career pathways that complement analytical skills. For those interested in business and marketing, pursuing an ms in digital marketing degree cost usa is a practical option. These programs often balance affordability with promising salary prospects, ideal for math graduates looking to expand their expertise.

For professionals aiming to quickly advance their careers, many students consider year long mba programs. These intensive courses provide strong leadership and management skills in a condensed timeline, allowing math graduates to leverage quantitative problem-solving in business contexts.

Flexibility is another key factor when selecting graduate programs. Online options such as online mba accepting transfer credits enable students to apply previous coursework toward their degree, saving time and tuition costs while maintaining progress in competitive fields.

Additionally, with the rise of data-driven decision-making, many mathematics students explore analytics masters programs. These degrees deepen data analysis skills and open careers in growing industries like finance, technology, and healthcare.

Best Scientists Citing Ulf Böckenholt

Trending Scientists