World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Social Sciences and Humanities

D-Index
33
Citations
4251
World Ranking
7129
National Ranking
3460

Ute Römer 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 Ute Römer sits on this spectrum.

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 publications 570+

This scientist: 79 publications — 5th percentile

5% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Ute Römer 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 Ute Römer sits on this spectrum.

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: 33 D-Index — 10th percentile

10% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Best Publications

  • Corpus Research Applications in Second Language Teaching

    Ute Römer

  • Usage-Based Approaches to Language Acquisition and Processing: Cognitive and Corpus Investigations of Construction Grammar

    Nick C. Ellis;Ute Römer;Matthew Brook O'Donnell

  • The acquisition of tense-aspect: Converging evidence from corpora and telicity ratings

    Stefanie Wulff;Nick C. Ellis;Ute Romer;Kathleen Bardovi-Harlig

  • The inseparability of lexis and grammar: Corpus linguistic perspectives

    Ute Römer

  • Progressives, patterns, pedagogy

    Ute Römer

  • Pedagogical Applications of Corpora: Some Reflections on the Current Scope and a Wish List for Future Developments

    Ute Römer

  • Revealing disciplinary variation in student writing: a multi-dimensional analysis of the Michigan Corpus of Upper-level Student Papers (MICUSP)

    Jack A. Hardy;Ute Römer

  • From student hard drive to web corpus (part 1): the design, compilation and genre classification of the Michigan Corpus of Upper-level Student Papers (MICUSP)

    Ute Römer;Matthew Brook O'Donnell

  • The development of formulaic sequences in first and second language writing: Investigating effects of frequency, association, and native norm

    Matthew Brook O'Donnell;Ute Römer;Nick C. Ellis

  • Usage‐Based Language: Investigating the Latent Structures That Underpin Acquisition

    Nick C. Ellis;Matthew Brook O'Donnell;Ute Römer

  • Comparing real and ideal language learner input: The use of an EFL textbook corpus in corpus linguistics and language teaching

    Ute Römer

  • English in Academia: Does Nativeness Matter?

    Ute Römer;Ann Arbor

  • Establishing the phraseological profile of a text type: The construction of meaning in academic book reviews

    Ute Römer

  • A corpus-driven approach to modal auxiliaries and their didactics

    Ute Römer

  • Second Language Learner Knowledge of Verb-Argument Constructions: Effects of Language Transfer and Typology.

    Ute Römer;Matthew Brook O'Donnell;Nick C. Ellis

  • The processing of verb-argument constructions is sensitive to form, function, frequency, contingency and prototypicality

    Nick C. Ellis;Matthew Brook O'Donnell;Ute Römer

  • Usage‐Based Language Learning

    Nick C. Ellis;Matthew Brook O'Donnell;Ute Römer

  • Second language verb-argument constructions are sensitive to form, function, frequency, contingency, and prototypicality

    Nick C. Ellis;Matthew Brook O'Donnell;Ute Römer

  • Corpus research and practice: What help do teachers need and what can we offer?

    Ute Römer

  • Exploring the lexis-grammar interface

    Ute Römer;Rainer Schulze

Frequent Co-Authors

Nick C. Ellis
Nick C. Ellis University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Matthew O'Donnell
Matthew O'Donnell University of Washington
John M. Swales
John M. Swales University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Scott A. Crossley
Scott A. Crossley Vanderbilt University
Kathleen Bardovi-Harlig
Kathleen Bardovi-Harlig 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:

Best Scientists Citing Ute Römer