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
Psychology 63 3040 2797 1728 1554 131 36900

Vladas Griskevicius publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Vladas Griskevicius between 2006 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Vladas Griskevicius published across 20 years, from 2006 to 2025, averaging 7 papers a year. Output peaked at 20 publications in 2012. 1 of the 140 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2006 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 20. Peak 20 publications in 2012. 2006: 4 publications 2007: 8 publications 2008: 9 publications 2009: 11 publications 2010: 11 publications 2011: 14 publications 2012: 20 publications 2013: 9 publications 2014: 14 publications 2015: 8 publications 2016: 5 publications 2017: 8 publications 2018: 6 publications 2019: 5 publications 2020: 6 publications 2021: 1 publication 2022: 0 publications 2023: 0 publications 2024: 0 publications 2025: 1 publication
2006 2025

140 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Vladas Griskevicius: publications per year, 2006 to 2025
Year Publications
2006 4
2007 8
2008 9
2009 11
2010 11
2011 14
2012 20
2013 9
2014 14
2015 8
2016 5
2017 8
2018 6
2019 5
2020 6
2021 1
2022 0
2023 0
2024 0
2025 1
Total 140
Download as CSV

Vladas Griskevicius publication distribution in Psychology in 2026

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

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 69 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 31–40 to 705+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 736. Most scientists, 736, have 101–110 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 131–140 publications, is where this scientist sits. 31–40 publications: 6 scientists 41–50 publications: 52 scientists 51–60 publications: 138 scientists 61–70 publications: 299 scientists 71–80 publications: 461 scientists 81–90 publications: 605 scientists 91–100 publications: 713 scientists 101–110 publications: 736 scientists 111–120 publications: 686 scientists 121–130 publications: 670 scientists 131–140 publications: 644 scientists 141–150 publications: 597 scientists 151–160 publications: 576 scientists 161–170 publications: 477 scientists 171–180 publications: 450 scientists 181–190 publications: 397 scientists 191–200 publications: 343 scientists 201–210 publications: 328 scientists 211–220 publications: 313 scientists 221–230 publications: 283 scientists 231–240 publications: 226 scientists 241–250 publications: 196 scientists 251–260 publications: 201 scientists 261–270 publications: 171 scientists 271–280 publications: 151 scientists 281–290 publications: 139 scientists 291–300 publications: 113 scientists 301–310 publications: 102 scientists 311–320 publications: 100 scientists 321–330 publications: 76 scientists 331–340 publications: 92 scientists 341–350 publications: 85 scientists 351–360 publications: 69 scientists 361–370 publications: 71 scientists 371–380 publications: 63 scientists 381–390 publications: 58 scientists 391–400 publications: 57 scientists 401–410 publications: 43 scientists 411–420 publications: 33 scientists 421–430 publications: 50 scientists 431–440 publications: 41 scientists 441–450 publications: 32 scientists 451–460 publications: 27 scientists 461–470 publications: 28 scientists 471–480 publications: 25 scientists 481–490 publications: 28 scientists 491–500 publications: 20 scientists 501–510 publications: 23 scientists 511–520 publications: 26 scientists 521–530 publications: 17 scientists 531–540 publications: 21 scientists 541–550 publications: 14 scientists 551–560 publications: 16 scientists 561–570 publications: 10 scientists 571–580 publications: 22 scientists 581–590 publications: 9 scientists 591–600 publications: 14 scientists 601–610 publications: 9 scientists 611–620 publications: 11 scientists 621–630 publications: 4 scientists 631–640 publications: 7 scientists 641–650 publications: 5 scientists 651–660 publications: 10 scientists 661–670 publications: 8 scientists 671–680 publications: 8 scientists 681–690 publications: 4 scientists 691–700 publications: 3 scientists 701–704 publications: 4 scientists 705+ publications: 100 scientists
31–40 publications 705+

This scientist: 131 publications — 39th percentile

39% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
31–40 6
41–50 52
51–60 138
61–70 299
71–80 461
81–90 605
91–100 713
101–110 736
111–120 686
121–130 670
131–140 644 131
141–150 597
151–160 576
161–170 477
171–180 450
181–190 397
191–200 343
201–210 328
211–220 313
221–230 283
231–240 226
241–250 196
251–260 201
261–270 171
271–280 151
281–290 139
291–300 113
301–310 102
311–320 100
321–330 76
331–340 92
341–350 85
351–360 69
361–370 71
371–380 63
381–390 58
391–400 57
401–410 43
411–420 33
421–430 50
431–440 41
441–450 32
451–460 27
461–470 28
471–480 25
481–490 28
491–500 20
501–510 23
511–520 26
521–530 17
531–540 21
541–550 14
551–560 16
561–570 10
571–580 22
581–590 9
591–600 14
601–610 9
611–620 11
621–630 4
631–640 7
641–650 5
651–660 10
661–670 8
671–680 8
681–690 4
691–700 3
701–704 4
705+ 100
Download as CSV

Vladas Griskevicius D-index placement in Psychology in 2026

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

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 58 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 144+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 702. Most scientists, 702, have 32–33 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 62–63 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 30–31 D-Index: 398 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 702 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 671 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 659 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 641 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 671 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 617 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 558 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 495 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 487 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 445 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 390 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 408 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 345 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 325 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 321 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 248 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 290 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 218 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 219 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 215 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 183 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 169 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 132 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 137 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 120 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 112 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 86 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 101 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 83 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 77 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 70 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 78 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 58 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 53 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 57 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 48 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 53 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 46 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 24 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 35 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 27 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 31 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 22 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 16 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 24 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 18 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 11 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 19 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 10 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 16 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 10 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 12 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 8 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 5 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 12 scientists 144+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30–31 D-Index 144+

This scientist: 63 D-Index — 73rd percentile

73% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 398
32–33 702
34–35 671
36–37 659
38–39 641
40–41 671
42–43 617
44–45 558
46–47 495
48–49 487
50–51 445
52–53 390
54–55 408
56–57 345
58–59 325
60–61 321
62–63 248 63
64–65 290
66–67 218
68–69 219
70–71 215
72–73 183
74–75 169
76–77 132
78–79 137
80–81 120
82–83 112
84–85 86
86–87 101
88–89 83
90–91 77
92–93 70
94–95 78
96–97 58
98–99 53
100–101 57
102–103 48
104–105 53
106–107 46
108–109 24
110–111 35
112–113 27
114–115 32
116–117 31
118–119 22
120–121 16
122–123 24
124–125 18
126–127 11
128–129 19
130–131 10
132–133 16
134–135 10
136–137 12
138–139 8
140–141 5
142–143 12
144+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

Vladas Griskevicius is affiliated with the University of Minnesota in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on fields related to Psychology, with specific contributions across Social Psychology, Applied Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Clinical Psychology, and General Decision Sciences.

The scientist's work covers various topics including:

  • Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Optimism, Hope, and Well-being

Griskevicius has published research in a selection of academic venues, notably:

  • Journal of the Association for Consumer Research
  • Development and Psychopathology
  • Journal of Consumer Research
  • Social Marketing Quarterly

Some of their recent papers include:

  • "Scarcity and Consumer Decision Making: Is Scarcity a Mindset, a Threat, a Reference Point, or a Journey?" (2020) published in Journal of the Association for Consumer Research
  • "The effects of childhood unpredictability and harshness on emotional control and relationship quality: A life history perspective" (2021) published in Development and Psychopathology
  • "From Cradle to Grave: How Childhood and Current Environments Impact Consumers' Subjective Life Expectancy and Decision-Making" (2020) published in Journal of Consumer Research
  • "Understanding How Sustainability Initiatives Fail: A Framework to Aid Design of Effective Interventions" (2020) published in Social Marketing Quarterly
  • "How Early-Life Resource Scarcity Influences Self-Confidence and Task Completion Judgments" (2020) published in Journal of the Association for Consumer Research

Frequent coauthors in the scientist's publications include:

  • Ohad Szepsenwol
  • Jeffry A. Simpson
  • Osnat Zamir
  • Chiraag Mittal
  • Kelly Goldsmith

Griskevicius's research integrates multiple perspectives and methodologies within psychology to examine how environmental factors, childhood experiences, and decision-making processes influence behavior and emotional well-being.

Best Publications

  • The Constructive, Destructive, and Reconstructive Power of Social Norms

    P. Wesley Schultz;Jessica M. Nolan;Robert B. Cialdini;Noah J. Goldstein

  • A Room with a Viewpoint: Using Social Norms to Motivate Environmental Conservation in Hotels

    Noah J. Goldstein;Robert B. Cialdini;Vladas Griskevicius

  • Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation.

    Vladas Griskevicius;Joshua M. Tybur;Bram Van den Bergh

  • Normative Social Influence is Underdetected

    Jessica M. Nolan;P. Wesley Schultz;Robert B. Cialdini;Noah J. Goldstein

  • Renovating the Pyramid of Needs: Contemporary Extensions Built Upon Ancient Foundations

    Douglas T. Kenrick;Vladas Griskevicius;Steven L. Neuberg;Mark Schaller

  • Microbes, mating, and morality: individual differences in three functional domains of disgust.

    Joshua M. Tybur;Debra Lieberman;Vladas Griskevicius

  • Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals.

    Vladas Griskevicius;Joshua M. Tybur;Jill M. Sundie;Robert B. Cialdini

  • The influence of mortality and socioeconomic status on risk and delayed rewards: a life history theory approach.

    Vladas Griskevicius;Joshua M. Tybur;Andrew W. Delton;Theresa E. Robertson

  • The evolutionary basis of risky adolescent behavior: Implications for science, policy, and practice

    Bruce J. Ellis;Marco Del Giudice;Thomas J. Dishion;Aurelio José Figueredo

  • Peacocks, Porsches, and Thorstein Veblen: Conspicuous Consumption as a Sexual Signaling System

    Jill M. Sundie;Douglas T. Kenrick;Vladas Griskevicius;Joshua M. Tybur

  • When the Economy Falters, Do People Spend or Save? Responses to Resource Scarcity Depend on Childhood Environments

    Vladas Griskevicius;Joshua M. Ackerman;Stephanie M. Cantú;Andrew W. Delton

  • Environmental Contingency in Life History Strategies: The Influence of Mortality and Socioeconomic Status on Reproductive Timing

    Vladas Griskevicius;Andrew W. Delton;Theresa E. Robertson;Joshua M. Tybur

  • Conspicuous consumption, relationships, and rivals: Women's luxury products as signals to other women

    Yajin Wang;Vladas Griskevicius

  • Going Along Versus Going Alone: When Fundamental Motives Facilitate Strategic (Non)Conformity

    Vladas Griskevicius;Noah J. Goldstein;Chad R. Mortensen;Robert B. Cialdini

  • Evolution, stress, and sensitive periods: the influence of unpredictability in early versus late childhood on sex and risky behavior.

    Jeffry A. Simpson;Vladas Griskevicius;Sally I-Chun Kuo;Sooyeon Sung

  • Fundamental motives: How evolutionary needs influence consumer behavior

    Vladas Griskevicius;Douglas T. Kenrick

  • Aggress to impress: hostility as an evolved context-dependent strategy.

    Vladas Griskevicius;Joshua M. Tybur;Steven W. Gangestad;Elaine F. Perea

  • Influence of different positive emotions on persuasion processing: a functional evolutionary approach.

    Vladas Griskevicius;Michelle N. Shiota;Samantha L. Neufeld

  • Peacocks, Picasso, and parental investment: The effects of romantic motives on creativity

    Vladas Griskevicius;Robert B. Cialdini;Douglas T. Kenrick

  • Beyond risk and protective factors: An adaptation-based approach to resilience

    Bruce J. Ellis;Jean Marie Bianchi;Vladas Griskevicius;Willem E. Frankenhuis

  • Blatant Benevolence and Conspicuous Consumption: When Romantic Motives Elicit Strategic Costly Signals

    Vladas Griskevicius;Joshua Tybur;Jill Sundie

Frequent Co-Authors

Douglas T. Kenrick
Douglas T. Kenrick Arizona State University
Jeffry A. Simpson
Jeffry A. Simpson University of Minnesota
Robert B. Cialdini
Robert B. Cialdini Arizona State University
Joshua M. Tybur
Joshua M. Tybur Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Norman P. Li
Norman P. Li Singapore Management University
Joshua M. Ackerman
Joshua M. Ackerman University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Steven L. Neuberg
Steven L. Neuberg Arizona State University
P. Wesley Schultz
P. Wesley Schultz Claremont Graduate University
Mark van Vugt
Mark van Vugt Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Mark Schaller
Mark Schaller University of British Columbia

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

As you explore studying psychology in the USA, it’s worth considering related online degree options and the range of career pathways available. Psychology programs are now widely offered online by top institutions, making this an accessible option for students nationwide.

Prospective students should review regional program rankings to find the right fit. For example, the best psychology degree programs ranking in Austin highlights top-rated institutions in Texas, while those interested in the West Coast can explore the best psychology program rankings in California. Other major hubs, such as South Carolina and North Carolina, also feature strong programs—see the best psychology degree rankings in Charleston and best psychology program rankings in Charlotte for more options.

With a degree in psychology—whether earned on campus or online—graduates can pursue diverse paths, from counseling and clinical work to roles in human resources, marketing, education, or research. Many online programs mirror on-campus offerings in both content and career preparation, helping you build a solid foundation for your future.

Best Scientists Citing Vladas Griskevicius

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles