These 50+ Houston scientists rank among world’s most cited

science stars

UH Professor Zhifeng Ren is one of 50 Houston-area researchers named to Clarivate’s Highly Cited Researchers list for their broad and lasting impact. Photo courtesy UH.

Fifty-one scientists and professors from Houston-area universities and institutions were named among the most cited in the world for their research in medicine, materials sciences and an array of other fields.

The Clarivate Highly Cited Researchers considers researchers who have authored multiple "Highly Cited Papers" that rank in the top 1percent by citations for their fields in the Web of Science Core Collection. The final list is then determined by other quantitative and qualitative measures by Clarivate's judges to recognize "researchers whose exceptional and community-wide contributions shape the future of science, technology and academia globally."

This year, 6,868 individual researchers from 60 different countries were named to the list. About 38 percent of the researchers are based in the U.S., with China following in second place at about 20 percent.

However, the Chinese Academy of Sciences brought in the most entries, with 258 researchers recognized. Harvard University with 170 researchers and Stanford University with 141 rounded out the top 3.

Looking more locally, the University of Texas at Austin landed among the top 50 institutions for the first time this year, tying for 46th place with the Mayo Clinic and University of Minnesota Twin Cities, each with 27 researchers recognized.

Houston once again had a strong showing on the list, with MD Anderson leading the pack. Below is a list of the Houston-area highly cited researchers and their fields.

UT MD Anderson Cancer Center

  • Ajani Jaffer (Cross-Field)
  • James P. Allison (Cross-Field)
  • Maria E. Cabanillas (Cross-Field)
  • Boyi Gan (Molecular Biology and Genetics)
  • Maura L. Gillison (Cross-Field)
  • David Hong (Cross-Field)
  • Scott E. Kopetz (Clinical Medicine)
  • Pranavi Koppula (Cross-Field)
  • Guang Lei (Cross-Field)
  • Sattva S. Neelapu (Cross-Field)
  • Padmanee Sharma (Molecular Biology and Genetics)
  • Vivek Subbiah (Clinical Medicine)
  • Jennifer A. Wargo (Molecular Biology and Genetics)
  • William G. Wierda (Clinical Medicine)
  • Ignacio I. Wistuba (Clinical Medicine)
  • Yilei Zhang (Cross-Field)
  • Li Zhuang (Cross-Field)

Rice University

  • Pulickel M. Ajayan (Materials Science)
  • Pedro J. J. Alvarez (Environment and Ecology)
  • Neva C. Durand (Cross-Field)
  • Menachem Elimelech (Chemistry and Environment and Ecology)
  • Zhiwei Fang (Cross-Field)
  • Naomi J. Halas (Cross-Field)
  • Jun Lou (Materials Science)
  • Aditya D. Mohite (Cross-Field)
  • Peter Nordlander (Cross-Field)
  • Andreas S. Tolias (Cross-Field)
  • James M. Tour (Cross-Field)
  • Robert Vajtai (Cross-Field)
  • Haotian Wang (Chemistry and Materials Science)
  • Zhen-Yu Wu (Cross-Field)

Baylor College of Medicine

  • Nadim J. Ajami (Cross-Field)
  • Biykem Bozkurt (Clinical Medicine)
  • Hashem B. El-Serag (Clinical Medicine)
  • Matthew J. Ellis (Cross-Field)
  • Richard A. Gibbs (Cross-Field)
  • Peter H. Jones (Pharmacology and Toxicology)
  • Sanjay J. Mathew (Cross-Field)
  • Joseph F. Petrosino (Cross-Field)
  • Fritz J. Sedlazeck (Biology and Biochemistry)
  • James Versalovic (Cross-Field)

University of Houston

  • Zhifeng Ren (Cross-Field)
  • Yan Yao (Cross-Field)
  • Yufeng Zhao (Cross-Field)
  • UT Health Science Center Houston
  • Hongfang Liu (Cross-Field)
  • Louise D. McCullough (Cross-Field)
  • Claudio Soto (Cross-Field)

UTMB Galveston

  • Erez Lieberman Aiden (Cross-Field)
  • Pei-Yong Shi (Cross-Field)

Houston Methodist

  • Eamonn M. M. Quigley (Cross-Field)
From Your Site Articles
Serious product reviewers need peers and audiences to see them as credible. But new research indicates that pursuing credibility may compromise the objectivity of their evaluations. Photo via Getty Images

Houston research: How social pressures are affecting digital product evaluations

houston voices

Theoretically, product evaluations should be impartial and unbiased. However, this assumption overlooks a crucial truth about product evaluators: They are human beings who are concerned about maintaining credibility with their audience, especially their peer evaluators.

Because evaluators must also care about being perceived as legitimate yet skillful themselves, certain social pressures are at play that potentially influence their product reviews.

Research by Minjae Kim (Rice Business) and Daniel DellaPosta (Penn State) takes up the question of how evaluators navigate those pressures. They find that in some cases, evaluators uphold majority opinion to appear legitimate and authoritative. In other contexts, they offer a contrasting viewpoint so that they seem more refined and sophisticated.

Pretend a movie critic gives an uplifting review of a widely overlooked film. By departing from the aesthetic judgments of cinema aficionados, the reviewer risks losing credibility with their audience. Not only does the reviewer fail to understand this specific film, the audience might say; they fail to understand film and filmmaking, broadly.

But it’s also conceivable, in other situations, that the dissenting evaluator will come across as uniquely perceptive.

What makes the difference between these conflicting perceptions?

Partly, it depends on how niche or mainstream the product is. With large-audience products, Kim and DellaPosta hypothesize, evaluators are more willing to contradict widespread opinion. (Without a large audience, contradicting opinions are like the sound of a tree that falls in a forest without anyone nearby to hear.)

The perceived classiness of the product can affect the evaluator’s approach, as well. It’s easier to dissent from majority opinion on products deemed “lowbrow” than those deemed “highbrow.” Kim and DellaPosta suggest it’s more of a risk to downgrade a “highbrow” product that seems to require more sophisticated taste (e.g., classical music) and easier to downgrade a highly rated yet “lowbrow” product that seems easier to appreciate (e.g., a blockbuster movie).

Thus, the “safe spot” for disagreeing with established opinion is when a product has already been thoroughly and highly reviewed yet appears easier to understand. In that case, evaluators might sense an opportunity to stand out, rather than try to fit in. But disagreeing with something just for the sake of disagreeing can make people think you’re not a fair or reasonable evaluator. To avoid that perception, it might be better to agree with the high rating.

To test their hypotheses, Kim and DellaPosta used data from beer enthusiast site BeerAdvocate.com, an online platform where amateur evaluators review beers while also engaging with other users. Online reviewers publicly rate and describe their impressions of a variety of beers, from craft to mainstream.

The data set included 1.66 million user-submitted reviews of American-produced beers, including 82,077 unique beers, 4,302 brewers, 47,561 reviewers and 103 unique styles of beer. The reviews spanned from December 2000 to September 2015.

When the researchers compared scores given to the same beer over time, they confirmed their hypothesis about the conditions under which evaluators contradict the majority opinion. On average, reviewers were more inclined to contradict the majority opinions for a beer that had been highly rated and widely reviewed. When reviewers considered a particular brew to be a “lowbrow,” downgrading occurred to an even greater extent.

Kim and DellaPosta’s research has implications for both producers and consumers. Both groups should be aware of the social dynamics involved in product evaluation. The research suggests that reviews and ratings are as much about elevating the people who make them as they are about product quality.

Making evaluators identifiable and non-anonymous may help increase accountability for what they say online — a seemingly positive thing. But Kim and DellaPosta reveal a potential downside: Knowing who evaluators are, Kim says, “might warp the ratings in ways that depart from true objective quality.”

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and was based on research from Minjae Kim, assistant professor of Management – Organizational Behavior at Rice Business, and Daniel DellaPosta, associate professor of Sociology and Social Data Analytics at Pennsylvania State University.

Harish Krishnamoorthy is one of four fellows recognized by the program — and the first from UH to receive the honor. Photo via UH.edu

Houston researcher tapped for prestigious fellowship for offshore safety innovation

big win

A University of Houston professor has been selected by a national organization to “contribute to the understanding, management and reduction of systemic risk in offshore energy activities.”

The Gulf Research Program of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine announced that Harish Krishnamoorthy, assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Houston, is one of four selected early-career research fellows in the Offshore Energy Safety track. Krishnamoorthy is the first researcher from UH selected for the recognition.

“I am happy and honored to be the first one, but hopefully there will be a lot more in the coming years,” Krishnamoorthy says in a UH news release.

The award, which isn't granted based on a specific project, includes a $76,000 grant, mentor support, and access to a network of current and past cohorts.

Created in 2013, the program is an independent, science-based program founded as part of legal settlements with the companies involved in the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster. Its goal is "to enhance offshore energy system safety and protect human health and the environment by catalyzing advances in science, practice and capacity, generating long-term benefits for the Gulf of Mexico region and the nation," the release reads.

“These exceptional individuals are working hard to pursue new research, technical capabilities, and approaches that address some of the greatest challenges facing the Gulf and Alaska regions today,” says Karena Mary Mothershed, senior program manager for the Gulf Research Program’s Board on Gulf Education and Engagement. “We are incredibly excited to announce these new Early-Career Research Fellows, and to continue supporting them as they make lasting impacts.”

Krishnamoorthy, who also serves as associate director of the Power Electronics, Microgrids and Subsea Electric Systems Center at UH, has expertise is in power electronics, power converters, and offshore technologies. His research interests include high-density power conversion for grid interface of energy systems, machine learning-based methods for improvement in quality and reliability of power electronics, advanced electronics and control for mission-critical applications.

According to Krishnamoorthy, there are around 1,500 offshore rigs — with a large amount located North Sea and the Gulf of Mexico. There's a need to improve existing systems, according to Krishnamoorthy, and this process of evolving the grid comes with safety risks and challenges.

“When there are so many electronics involved, safety and reliability are going to be very critical,” Krishnamoorthy says in he release. “I have been looking at safety aspects a lot in my research as well as how to connect subsea oil and gas systems with offshore renewable systems.”

In 2022, Krishnamoorthy was recognized as an OTC Emerging Leader at the Offshore Technology Conference for his contributions to offshore safety and workforce development in offshore, as well as reducing the carbon emissions.

Here's what Houston research news dominated this year on InnovationMap. Photo via Getty Images

Looking back: Top 5 most-read Houston research-focused stories of 2022

2022 in review

Editor's note: As 2022 comes to a close, InnovationMap is looking back at the year's top stories in Houston innovation. In many cases, innovative startups originate from meticulous research deep within institutions. This past year, InnovationMap featured stories on these research institutions — from their breakthrough innovations to funding fueling it all. Here are five Houston research-focused articles that stood out to readers this year — be sure to click through to read the full story.


Texas nonprofit cancer research funder doles out millions to health professionals moving to Houston

These cancer research professionals just got fresh funding from a statewide organization. Photo by Dwight C. Andrews/Greater Houston Convention and Visitors Bureau

Thanks in part to multimillion-dollar grants from the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas, two top-flight cancer researchers are taking key positions at Houston’s Baylor College of Medicine.

Dr. Pavan Reddy and Dr. Michael Taylor each recently received a grant of $6 million from the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas.

Reddy is leaving his position as chief of hematology-oncology and deputy director at the University of Michigan’s Rogel Cancer Center to become director of the Baylor College of Medicine’s Dan L. Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center. Dr. C. Kent Osborne stepped down as the center’s director in 2020; Dr. Helen Heslop has been the interim director. Continue reading.

Rice University deploys grant funding to 9 innovative Houston research projects

Nine research projects at Rice University have been granted $25,000 to advance their innovative solutions. Photo courtesy of Rice

Over a dozen Houston researchers wrapped up 2021 with the news of fresh funding thanks to an initiative and investment fund from Rice University.

The Technology Development Fund is a part of the university’s Creative Ventures initiative, which has awarded more than $4 million in grants since its inception in 2016. Rice's Office of Technology Transfer orchestrated the $25,000 grants across nine projects. Submissions were accepted through October and the winners were announced a few weeks ago. Continue reading.

Houston researchers create unprecedented solar energy technology that improves on efficiency

Two researchers out of the University of Houston have ideated a way to efficiently harvest carbon-free energy 24 hours a day. Photo via Getty Images

Two Houstonians have developed a new system of harvesting solar energy more efficiently.

Bo Zhao, the Kalsi Assistant Professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Houston, along with his doctoral student Sina Jafari Ghalekohneh, have created a technology that theoretically allows solar energy to be harvested to the thermodynamic limit, which is the absolute maximum rate sunlight can be converted into electricity, as reported in a September article for Physical Review Applied.

Traditional solar thermophotovoltaics (STPVs), or the engines used to extract electrical power from thermal radiation, run at an efficiency limit of 85.4 percent, according to a statement from UH. Zhao and Ghalekohneh's system was able to reach a rate of 93.3 percent, also known as the Landsberg Limit. Continue reading.

Texas A&M receives $10M to create cybersecurity research program

Texas A&M University has announced a new cybersecurity-focused initiative. Photo via tamu.edu

Texas A&M University has launched an institute for research and education regarding cybersecurity.

The Texas A&M Global Cyber Research Institute is a collaboration between the university and a Texas A&M University System engineering research agency, the Texas A&M Engineering Experiment Station. The research agency and Texas A&M are also home to the Texas A&M Cybersecurity Center.

The institute is funded by $10 million in gifts from former Texas A&M student Ray Rothrock, a venture capitalist and cybersecurity expert, and other donors. Continue reading.

Houston research organization doles out $28M in grants to innovators across Texas

Houston-based Welch Foundation has awarded almost $28 million in chemical research grants throughout Texas this year. Photo via Getty Images

Chemical researchers at seven institutions in the Houston area are receiving nearly $12.9 million grants from the Houston-based Welch Foundation.

In the Houston area, 43 grants are going to seven institutions:

  • Baylor College of Medicine
  • Rice University
  • Texas A&M University
  • Texas A&M University Health Science Center
  • University of Houston
  • University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
  • University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston

The Welch Foundation is awarding almost $28 million in chemical research grants throughout Texas this year. The money will be allocated over a three-year period. Continue reading.

Future research may benefit from both analyzing and improving current decision making processes. Photo via Getty Images

Houston research: The future of decision making in energy operations

houston voices

Real options represent the decisions companies can make in the face of evolving risk. In the energy and commodity industries, real options are ubiquitous, including the extraction, processing and refinement, storage, and transportation of natural resources. These choices are influenced by ever-changing market and environmental conditions.

Because of these uncertainties, the energy industry has been a key focus of the operations literature on real options. Rice Business professor Nicola Secomandi, along with University of Illinois at Chicago College of Business Administration professor Selvaprabu Nadajarah, were recently invited by the European Journal of Operational Research to conduct a review of the operations literature on real options in energy. Their review included 80 papers across 10 journals active in the field. The research was mostly conducted during Secomandi’s time at the Tepper School of Business at Carnegie Mellon University.

The review examined how often different types of energy and methods of studying related business processes appeared in the operations literature. Nearly a quarter of the papers considered natural gas, more often than any other energy type. Natural gas storage was the most studied process, while the transport and sale of natural gas were less discussed.

While only 10 percent of the papers focused on electricity by itself, mostly in the context of battery management, electricity was discussed alongside emissions and the environment in 22.5 percent of the papers—almost as often as natural gas. About 11 percent of the papers examined both electricity and natural gas.

Roughly 21 percent of the papers focused on crude oil and refined products. Exploration, development, and abandonment of crude oil fields were common topics, while work on crude oil refining and gasoline logistics was rarer.

The review looked at the frequency of use of five categories: real option types, valuation methodologies, model formulations, price risk dynamics, and optimization schemes. Timing options, which irreversibly change the status of an asset when exercised, and switching options, which involve reversible changes, appeared with about equal frequency. Of the valuation methodologies, risk neutral valuation was employed the most often, appearing in nearly 78 percent of the papers. Model formulations were divided mainly between Markov decision processes, which assume that decisions are made at set times, and stochastic optimal control models, which assume that decisions are made continuously. About 63 percent of the papers discussed Markov decision processes, but at nearly 34 percent, stochastic optimal control models haven’t been entirely left out of the literature. Almost 75 percent of the papers formulated models based on spot prices as opposed to futures prices, and over 80 percent adopted normal distribution models, either alone or in combination with other models. Approximate solution approaches dominated within optimization schemes, appearing in 71 percent of the papers.

While several energy sources and analysis tools have been discussed in the literature, the possibilities for future research remain broad. The transition to clean energy sources may increase the complexity of already intricate operations. Its modeling and analysis may require more advanced models than existing ones.

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom and was based on research from Nicola Secomandi, the Houston Endowment Professor of Management – Operations Management at Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University.

We're living in the age of machine learning and artificial intelligence. Miguel Tovar/University of Houston

Now is the time to expand machine learning, says Houston researcher

Houston voices

One might not expect the game of checkers to have anything to do with artificial intelligence, but the game really marked the beginning of machine learning in 1959. Pioneered by an MIT professor named Arthur Lee Samuel, it was discovered that teaching a simple strategy game to a computer is not so simple when every move needs to be anticipated.

Smart machines Additionally, in a Forbes article about the difference between artificial intelligence and machine learning, Bernard Marr comments, "Artificial Intelligence is the broader concept of machines being able to carry out tasks in a way that we would consider 'smart'. And, machine learning is a current application of AI based around the idea that we should really just be able to give machines access to data and let them learn for themselves."

That's the premise of many a movie involving computers which become sentient, but is it really science fiction anymore?

Meet the new boss

Teaching a computer to think like a human is advantageous and includes the added bonus of increased speed. Computers aren't biased, either — which is why huge corporations, such as Unilever, use computers to thin out their first wave of applicants. You actually interview with a bot when you begin the employment process there.

Cause and effect AI and ML are often used in cybersecurity efforts — at least one would suppose. But in Security magazine, Jordan Mauriello writes: "AI/ML cannot do causation." That means artificial intelligence cannot, at this point in time, tell you why something happened. The why? is best left to experts who deal with game theory and other ways of determining how to defend against hypothetical attacks.

Get in on the ground floor

The field is growing and students at colleges across the country are beginning to train for careers in it in droves.

"America's top colleges are ramping up their research efforts and developing concentrations for their computer science degree programs to accommodate this high-tech field," writes Great Value Colleges on their blog. It looks as though this discipline is on an upward trajectory and shows no sign of slowing down.

------

This article originally appeared on the University of Houston's The Big Idea. Sarah Hill, the author of this piece, is the communications manager for the UH Division of Research.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Rice lands $15M U.S. Army award to launch next-gen wireless research center

defense funding

The U.S. Army Research Office has awarded Rice University $15 million to establish a new center for next-generation sensing and communications.

The five-year research center—dubbed the Center for Large Aperture Secure Sensing, Imaging and Communications (CLASSIC)—will unite researchers from universities and national laboratories to develop advanced antenna technologies for future wireless systems. Edward Knightly, the Sheafor-Lindsay Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Rice, will lead the center that “combines expertise in wireless networking, antennas, radar, artificial intelligence, circuits and physics to address growing demands on wireless systems,” according to Rice.

“The challenges we’re tackling require advances that span physics, hardware, communications and computing," Knightly said in a news release. “By combining those strengths in a single center, we can accelerate the development and demonstration of technologies that would not be possible through individual efforts alone.”

Joining Knightly will be Ashutosh Sabharwal of Rice, Sensen Li of the University of Texas at Austin, Hou-Tong Chen of Los Alamos National Laboratory, Danijela Cabric of UCLA, Josep M. Jornet and Tommaso Melodia of Northeastern University, Daniel M. Mittleman of Brown University, and Willie Padilla of Duke University.

Industry partners include Booz Allen Hamilton, Intel, Keysight, Lockheed Martin, MITRE, Northrop Grumman, Qualcomm and Raytheon.

CLASSIC researchers will investigate how large-scale antenna arrays (ELSAAs) can expand the capabilities of wireless systems where technology is limited.

ELSAAs use thousands of coordinated antenna elements to direct radio waves. Researchers aim to develop ways to use the technology to help maintain steady communication when signals are blocked or disrupted and to detect and generate detailed images of concealed objects.

Along with ELSAAs, the center will work to develop sensing techniques for threat detection, study wireless jamming and build resilient high-speed wireless networks. Researchers will ultimately validate the technology in labs and via drone-based field trials.

CLASSIC will also work on developing an AI-driven modeling framework that will simulate complex electromagnetic environments in real time.

“This award demonstrates Rice’s leadership in tackling complex national research challenges through collaboration across disciplines and institutions,” David Sholl, executive vice president for research at Rice, added in the release.

UH scores $18M NIH grant for chronic disease research

research funding

The University of Houston has received a coveted $18.8 million grant from the National Institutes of Health to launch a program to address the root causes of chronic disease.

Only 22 institutions nationwide receive this NIH award, and the 5-year process aligns with the newly established UH Health’s mission to expand healthcare innovations in Texas and beyond. The initiative will be housed in the UH Population Health department.

"This generous funding allows us to directly confront the root causes of chronic illness that place a heavy burden on so many families," Dr. Jonathan McCullers, vice president for health affairs at UH, said in a news release. "With the recent launch of UH Health, we have an unprecedented opportunity to translate scientific discovery into healthier outcomes for our communities by bringing together experts from across the university to improve health where it matters most.”

Through the program, UH researchers from different areas of expertise will work together to address the challenges of chronic illness by looking at biological, social and behavioral factors.

According to the university, chronic diseases like heart disease, diabetes, strokes and others are the leading cause of illness, disability and death in the U.S. They account for 90 percent of the nation’s $5.3 trillion in annual healthcare spending.

Bettina Beech, chief of population health and translational science at UH, serves as principal investigator for the program.

“Chronic disease management largely happens during the 8,700 hours each year that people are not visiting their healthcare provider,” Beech added in the news release. “While healthcare is indispensable, it only accounts for 20 percent of how health is created — genetics accounts for another 10 percent, and the other 70 percent is determined by behavior, social conditions and environment.”

With the funds from the grant, UH will also be able to expand research infrastructure, add to community partnerships, support complementary research, and invest in early-career investigators, according to the news release. UH also aims to develop solutions that could help ease the economic burden of chronic disease.

Report: Where Texas ranks among best and worst states to live in 2026

Texas Talk

After earning its worst-ever ranking last year, Texas has improved slightly on an evaluation of the best states to live, but it's still at the bottom of the pack.

Each year, WalletHub's analysts compare all 50 states using 51 livability metrics to measure their affordability, economy, education and health, quality of life, and safety. Factors that were weighed include the cost of living, homeownership rates, population and income growth rates, wealth gaps, public school system quality, road quality, crime rates, and many others.

The Lone Star State landed at No. 36 in 2026, making it the 15th worth state to live right now. That's on par with its 2024 ranking, and it's a two-spot improvement over its 2025 performance.

While Texas residents can brag about living in a state with the No. 1 highest number of restaurants per capita and the 7th best quality of life in the country, that's about it. Texas earned middling-to-poor scores among the four remaining livability rankings: safety (No. 33), affordability (No. 35), economy (No. 37), and education and health (No. 40).

Here's how Texas fared in other nationwide rankings in the study:

  • No. 27 – Income Growth
  • No. 30 – Housing Costs
  • No. 39 – Percentage of Population in Poverty
  • No. 42 – Percentage of Adults in Fair or Poor Health
  • No. 46 – Homeownership Rate
  • No. 49 – Percentage of Population Aged 25 and Older with a High School Diploma or Higher
  • No. 48 – Average Weekly Work Hours
  • No. 50 – Percentage of Insured Population

Texas has a lot of work to do to improve its livability for all of its residents, but especially for women, according to several other 2026 WalletHub studies. Texas is the fourth-worst state for women, the ninth-worst state for working mothers, and the seventh-worst place to have a baby based on limited access to maternal and pediatric healthcare.

At the very bottom of the report is New Mexico, ranking 50th overall, with Louisiana (No. 49), Mississippi (No. 48), Alaska (No. 47), and Arkansas (No. 46) rounding out the bottom five.

After holding on as the No. 1 best state to live for a few years in a row, Massachusetts now ranks No. 4 and was overtaken by Idaho (No. 1), New Jersey (No. 2), and Wisconsin (No. 3). New Hampshire rounds out the top five best states to live.

WalletHub's top 10 best states to live in 2026 are:

  • No. 1 – Idaho
  • No. 2 – New Jersey
  • No. 3 – Wisconsin
  • No. 4 – Massachusetts
  • No. 5 – New Hampshire
  • No. 6 – Wyoming
  • No. 7 – Utah
  • No. 8 – Minnesota
  • No. 9 – Pennsylvania
  • No. 10 – Florida
---

This article originally appeared on CultureMap.com.

View All Listings