Assessing the publication productivity of clinical psychology professors in Canadian psychological association-accredited Canadian psychology departments: A 10-year replication study.

Abstract

The landscape of academia in clinical psychology has changed drastically over the last 10 years. Since 2012, the Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) accredited six additional programmes, an influx of faculty joined the field, and research productivity substantially increased. Canadian productivity norms can also reasonably be expected to have meaningfully changed given changes in academia since norms were published in 2012. The present replication study was designed to update normative data for publication counts, citations, and h-indices for CPA-accredited clinical psychology professors stratified by rank and gender. The present study results evidenced that average and annual publication counts, citation counts, and h-indices have at least doubled in the last 10 years across all professorial ranks for men and women. Results also suggest gendered differences are diminishing, as men do not appear to be outproducing women except at the full professor rank. The top 15% of men and women professors from CPA-accredited clinical psychology programmes stratified by career status are detailed to recognize the academic achievements of individuals and promote transparency; however, inclusion as a top producer does not indicate the quality of psychology professors or represent their impact on the field. We caution against using any single set of indicators to evaluate any type of professorial productivity and recommend promoting the early success of researchers to truly engender equity.