Danielle Devine

526 citations
14 papers · 364 · h-index 11

Impact in

Papers in

Danielle Devine

13 papers receiving 325 citations

Peers

Danielle Devine
Comparison fields: 5 of 59
  • Clinical Psychology 134
  • Demography 62
  • Applied Psychology 26
  • General Health Professions 89
  • Genetics 37
Replace Garth Lipps with:
Garth Lipps Jamaica
Claudia Black United States
Merle A. Keitel United States
Sandra Cotton Australia
Anna Choi Hong Kong
Lauren D. Brumley United States
Lesley Hayes United Kingdom
Arthur C. Emlen United States
Shireen Shehzad Bhamani Pakistan
Myleme O. Harrison United States
Danielle Devine relative to Garth Lipps Jamaica Garth Lipps's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×3.0×
Garth Lipps · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Danielle Devine

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Danielle Devine's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Danielle Devine with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Danielle Devine more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Danielle Devine

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Danielle Devine. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Danielle Devine. The network helps show where Danielle Devine may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Danielle Devine, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Danielle Devine Line = papers co-authored together Danielle Devine links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

14 of 14 papers shown
#Work
1 200379
2 199450
3 199441
4 200037
5 199335
6 200034
7 200122
8 199618
9 199817
10 199613
11 199612
12 20004
13 20222
14 20200

About Danielle Devine

Danielle Devine is a scholar working on Clinical Psychology, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science, General Health Professions and Demography, having authored 14 papers that have together received 364 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Attachment and Relationship Dynamics (4 papers), Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development (3 papers), Family Dynamics and Relationships (3 papers), Intergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving (2 papers), Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation (2 papers), Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology (2 papers), Hemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders (1 paper) and Food Security and Health in Diverse Populations (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Clinical Psychology (134 citations), Demography (62 citations), Applied Psychology (26 citations), General Health Professions (89 citations) and Genetics (37 citations). Danielle Devine has collaborated with scholars based in United States. Frequent co-authors include Rex Forehand, Lorenzo Cohen, Rachel T. Fouladi, Patricia A. Parker, Tracy Kempton, Lisa Armistead, Patricia J. Long, Bryan Neighbors, Ronald T. Brown and James R. Eckman. Their work appears in journals such as Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Psycho-Oncology, Annals of Behavioral Medicine, Family Relations and Behavior Therapy.

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact