Research productivity in counseling psychology: An update and generalization study.

Assessed research productivity in counseling psychology at various institutions for the years 1976–1982 by determining the top 40 academic programs in terms of numbers of contributions to the Journal of Counseling Psychology alone and to this journal plus 4 other journals in which counseling psychologists publish. A good deal of change in the institutional rankings from W. M. Cox and V. Catt's (see record 1978-21651-001) 1970–1975 survey to the present survey was found. (12 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Changes in research productivity in counseling psychology: Revisiting Howard (1983) a decade later.

Institutional research productivity in counseling psychology was reassessed by totaling credits for articles published for the years 1983–1992 in the following counseling-related journals: Journal of Counseling Psychology, The Counseling Psychologist, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Journal of Vocational Behavior, and Journal of Counseling and Development. A number of programs made substantial jumps into the institutions ranked in the top 40. High intercorrelations among the 5 journals suggest the presence of an underlying research productivity factor, and program quality is discussed in the light of these results. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A Tabulation of Inferential Statistics Used in Psychology Journals.

Every year thousands of psychology students take courses in statistics. In spite of the importance attributed to statistics, there is no available tabulation of the usage of various statistics in the psychological literature to show what the student needs to know in order to interpret the literature and to show what statistics psychologists have found useful. This report presents such a tabulation. To allow comparisons between the statistics used in different fields of psychology, the journals examined were the APA journals that specialize in particular fields of psychology: Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, Journal of Consulting Psychology, Journal of Educational Psychology, and Journal of Experimental Psychology. Tabulations were made of the inferential statistics used in articles in these journals for the even-numbered years from 1948 to 1962, inclusive. The use of a particular type of statistical technique was recorded only once for each article, no matter how many times that technique was used in the article. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Research productivity in psychology based on publication in the journals of the American Psychological Association.

Institutions whose members were leading contributors of articles in the 13 journals published by the American Psychological Association over the last 10 years are identified. Composite productivity scores over the 13 journals are then compared with previous reputational ratings of institutions in psychology (Jones, Lindzey, & Coggeshall, 1982; Roose & Andersen, 1970) and also with previous productivity data (Cox & Catt, 1977; Jones et al., 1982). The overall relationship between reputation and productivity is fairly strong. However, school reputation is differentially related to productivity in specific journals. A relatively strong overall relationship is also noted between past and current productivity, but the degree of stability varies greatly from journal to journal. Schools that showed remarkable shifts over time in productivity and/or reputation are identified. Finally, overall productivity scores are adjusted by faculty size. Small but productive schools tend to emerge in this analysis. These results highlight schools in which a large proportion of the faculty publish in APA journals. Results of the entire study are discussed with regard to advising students in their selection of psychology graduate programs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Most of the subjects were White and middle class": Trends in published research on African Americans in selected APA journals, 1970–1989.

Six APA journals (Developmental Psychology, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Journal of Counseling Psychology, Journal of Educational Psychology, and Journal of Personality and Social Psychology) were content analyzed for the presence of empirical articles on African Americans during the 1970–1989 publication period. The analysis revealed a declining representation of African-American research in the 6 journals. In addition, the empirical literature that does exist was found to be lacking in methodological rigor, as defined by characteristics such as the reporting of the socioeconomic status (SES) of Ss and experimenter race. Explanations for the decline were suggested, and recommendations were proposed for alleviating the growing marginalization of African-American research in the journals of mainstream psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Journal of Animal Behavior and the early history of animal behavior studies in America.

The first American scientific journal devoted specifically to the study of animal behavior was the Journal of Animal Behavior, founded by Robert M. Yerkes in 1911. An examination of Yerkes's efforts to establish such a journal underscores the precariousness of animal behavior studies (and journal publications) in this period. The analysis of the different kinds of articles published by psychologists and zoologists in the Journal of Animal Behavior shows furthermore that already by the second decade of the twentieth century psychologists and zoologists were pursuing quite distinct programs of research in terms of their choices of animal subjects, topics of investigation, and research methodologies. The relation of the Journal of Animal Behavior to its successor, the Journal of Comparative Psychology, is discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Research productivity of psychologists in VA medical centers based on APA journal publication.

Investigated the research productivity of psychologists in VA medical centers, using a method similar to the one used by W. M. Cox and V. Catt (see record 1978-21651-001) to assess the productivity of university psychology departments. The 10 VA medical centers from which psychologists published most frequently in journals of the American Psychological Association during 1975–1984 are listed, and the journals in which these articles were published are outlined. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Editorial

This editorial provides general guidelines and instructions for submission to the Journal of Applied Psychology. It also announces some production changes to the Journal. JAP aspires to publish high-quality articles that make useful and original contributions to applied psychology, are technically accurate, are appropriate for the journal, and are clearly and concisely written. The author provides some thoughts about the Journal scope and policies as well as some hints about article writing and submissions. He concludes by thanking those who contribute to the success of JAP. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Double, double, toil and trouble: Pitfalls of suppositional inquiries of journal ratings.

Three recent comments in the September 1976 issue (Buss & McDermott; Levin & Kratochwill; Porter (see record 1990-57250-001; see record 1990-57248-001; and see record 1990-57249-001), attempting to deal with the difficult area of assessing journal "reputations," raised some interesting questions concerning our study reporting journal rankings (Koulack & Keselman, November 1975; see record 1976-24649-001). We are in agreement with Buss and McDermott (1976) that citations and rankings might not be measuring the same things, but we are in disagreement with Porter, who suggests that "fine ordering among journals is whimsical" (p. 675). In fact, as we suggest in our introduction and have demonstrated in the body of our article (Koulack & Keselman, 1975), journal rankings change as a function of type of work and area of interest. Perhaps Porter's (1976) findings might be a bit whimsical because of the procedure he used to obtain his correlations. Moreover, it is impossible to probe further because Porter does not present the rankings of the two journals chosen from the APA members' top 50, which appeared in either of the citation measures' top 50. Such data might provide some insight into the low correlations obtained between journal citations and rankings. For example, extremely low citation rankings on either citation index for these two journals, given their relatively high position in the APA membership rankings, would diminish the size of the correlation coefficients. The Levin and Kratochwill (1976) comment is somewhat annoying because it distorts a line from Shakespeare as well as misrepresents our presentation. They imply that (a) we thought our rankings represented a definitive approach to the journal rating problem, (b) we neglected to place emphasis on a table presented in the paper, and (c) respondents chose to ignore our instructions and in fact, rated journals on the basis of familiarity. In conclusion, we appreciate the fact that there are numerous ways of examining journal reputations (e.g., rankings by departmental chairpersons, rankings by APA membership, citations obtained from 77 psychology journals published in 1969, citations obtained from 3 psychology journals published from July 1973 to June 1975) and that each of them has potential value. However, comments that are not based on empirical investigation, such as those of Levin and Kratochwill (1976), are mere suppositions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Individual and institutional productivity of racial and ethnic minority research in the Journal of Counseling Psychology.

This study examined individual and institutional productivity of research pertaining to racial and ethnic minorities in the Journal of Counseling Psychology (JCP). Full-length articles appearing in JCP from 1988 to 1997 were examined. Two distinct methods to calculate productivity scores were used to obtain rankings of individual authors (G. S. Howard, D. A. Cole, & S. E. Maxwell, 1987) and institutions (D. J. Tinsley & H. E. Tinsley, 1979). Our findings identified the top most productive authors and institutions of ethnic and racial research published in JCP from 1988 to 1997. Implications of these findings and areas for future research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Trends in institutional contributions to the Journal of Counseling Psychology..

Tabulated the institutional affiliation of each author for the major articles, brief reports, unsolicited comments, and contributions classified as research frontier or research methodology that appeared in Volumes 1–24 of the Journal of Counseling Psychology (JCP). Separate tabulations were made for most institutions, but the contributions of the following types of institutions were combined within type: community colleges, community mental health centers, correctional institutions, medical hospitals, public schools, religious organizations, and VA facilities. The data are summarized for the formative years of the journal (Volumes 1–8), the period of transition to an American Psychological Association journal (Volumes 9–26), the most recent 8-yr period (Volumes 17–24), and the 1st 24 yrs of publication. The data are also tabulated for the 4 latest volumes (21–24) to evaluate recent trends in institutional contributions. The 15 leading institutional contributors are rank ordered, and the number of contributions are reported within each time period. In addition, the impact of reassignment of credit for dissertation-related research on institutional productivity is studied. The relationship between institutional contributions to JCP and the perceived prestige of the institution is also investigated. (9 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Editorial.

The Journal of Counseling Psychology, like other journals published by the American Psychological Association, is an aid to psychologists attempting to meet their responsibility for continuing scientific and professional education. Journals not only constitute the archives of our sciences, they provide immediate communication and facilitate, perhaps lubricate, the intricate processes of the scientific enterprise. The purpose of this editorial, however, is not to elaborate on the functions of this journal. Rather, the purpose is to call to the attention of our readers and to emphasize the importance of another medium for maintaining individual and organizational scientific and professional vitality. This medium consists of membership in and support of our scientific and professional associations. Readers and subscribers are urged to support actively and enthusiastically the Division of Counseling Psychology, Division 17 of the American Psychological Association. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Professional psychology in California responds to the special issue on peer review.

The recent Special Issue of Professional Psychology (February 1982) raises serious questions about our profession's involvement in programs of peer review and quality assurance. You can be sure that it was read with great interest by clinical psychologists here in California. We call on you, as the editor of Professional Psychology, to continue and to expand your exploration of the issues involved in peer review and quality assurance programs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Publication Productivity of Clinical Psychologists: A Correction Factor for Faculty Size.

Comments on the original article "Productivity ratings of psychology programs based on publications in clinical journals," by C. J. Golden, S. Kuperman, and D. Osmon (see record #198128771-001), which sought to identify the relative standing of clinical psychology programs by evaluating their frequency of publication in the major clinical journals. While the current authors feel Golden et al provide impressive and useful data on the relative productivity of different academic and nonacademic psychology programs with respect to their contributions to the clinical psychology literature, they also maintain that one point Golden et al failed to address is that faculties tend to vary greatly in size across institutions. Thus, the rankings of programs provided by Golden et al probably reflect different size programs, with larger programs contributing more to the clinical literature simply because there are more bodies available to engage in such activities than is true of smaller programs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The accuracy of reference lists in five experimental psychology journals.

Reference lists appended to published journals are of critical importance to readers of academic literature. They allow readers to retrieve cited sources, either to increase their own knowledge or to substantiate the authors' claims, and in so doing help to establish the judgment and credibility of the authors (M. F. McLellan et al, 1992). However, erroneous references detract from the intended function of reference lists by impeding retrieval searches and by providing misleading bibliographic information (G. de Lacey et al, 1985; McLellan et al, 1992). The present study aims to assess the accuracy of reference lists in five experimental psychology journals published by the American Psychological Association (APA) in 1999 (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, and Journal of Experimental Psychology: General). Perhaps the most disturbing result from this study is the finding that authors were incorrectly cited in 12% of reference list citations, with errors in the initials of the authors being the most common. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)