Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress.
19997.8k citationsEd Diener, Eunkook M. Suh et al.Psychological Bulletinprofile →
Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index.
This map shows the geographic impact of Ed Diener'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 Ed Diener with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ed Diener more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ed Diener. 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 Ed Diener. The network helps show where Ed Diener may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Ed Diener
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Ed Diener.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Ed Diener based on the total number of
citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges
represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together.
Node borders
signify the number of papers an author published with Ed Diener. Ed Diener is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Wright, Cheryl & Ed Diener. (2020). Advancing Participant-Oriented Research Models in Research Intensive Universities: A Case Study of Community Collaboration for Students with Autism. Journal of higher education outreach & engagement. 24(1). 143–152.1 indexed citations
Neve, Jan‐Emmanuel De, et al.. (2013). The Objective Benefits of Subjective Well-Being. London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science).211 indexed citations
Diener, Ed, Sik Hung Ng, James K. Harter, & Raksha Arora. (2010). Wealth and happiness across the world: Material prosperity predicts life evaluation, whereas psychosocial prosperity predicts positive feeling.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 99(1). 52–61.542 indexed citations breakdown →
Fujita, Frank & Ed Diener. (2005). Life Satisfaction Set Point: Stability and Change.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 88(1). 158–164.546 indexed citations breakdown →
Basabe, Nekane, Darío Páez, José Valencia, et al.. (2000). Sociocultural factors predicting subjective experience of emotion:a collective level analysis. Psicothema. 12(1). 55–69.43 indexed citations
16.
Diener, Ed, et al.. (1997). Recent findings on subjective well-being..431 indexed citations
17.
Diener, Ed, Lauren Goldstein, & Sarah C. Mangelsdorf. (1995). The Role of Prenatal Expectations in Parents' Reports of Infant Temperament. Merrill-palmer Quarterly. 41(2). 172–190.33 indexed citations
18.
Diener, Ed. (1994). Assessing subjective well-being: Progress and opportunities. Social Indicators Research. 31(2). 103–157.1600 indexed citations breakdown →
Fujita, Frank, Ed Diener, & Ed Sandvik. (1991). Gender differences in negative affect and well-being: The case for emotional intensity.. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 61(3). 427–434.529 indexed citations breakdown →
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.