Causal models of publishing productivity in psychology.

Abstract

Six theoretical models of academic publishing productivity were distilled from the literature in sociology, economics, and psychology. Although all theory-based models identify ability as a causal antecedent of productivity, it is rarely introduced in empirical studies. A measure of ability is operationalized and six causal models of publishing productivity are estimated by path analysis, using data on 162 academic psychologists. Results support key theoretical propositions of most models. Several models fit the data according to the chi-square criterion, but none include all the important determinants of productivity. A theoretically based best-fit model shows that ability affects publishing productivity directly, and also indirectly, by providing access to training in prestigious graduate programs. Attending a prestigious graduate program increases productivity by providing access to academic appointments in other prestigious programs. Sex of the researcher has a large direct effect on publishing quantity, but no effect on publishing quality.Although faculty job responsibilities are highly complex, the criteria used to evaluate them are clear, widely understood, and measurable. Faculty who publish flourish; those who do not perish. Prominence is achieved by publishing in quality journals and being cited by colleagues. The salience and measurability of publications and citations as performance criteria have inspired social scientists to explore their determinants.Distinctive theoretical explanations for why some academics are prolific and others are "silent" have emerged from several social science disciplines. Sociologists focus on the behavior of social groups, economists on the marginal costs and benefits of educational investments by individuals, and psychologists on the role of individual characteristics such as motivation, sex, and ability. Although scholars in the three disciplines offer diverse theories, most studies identify several of the same basic determinants of publishing productivity: ability, the quality or reputation of the graduate program, and the quality of the current academic department.Much of the empirical literature on publishing productivity

What does it Take to Get Promoted in Marketing Academia? Understanding Exceptional Publication Productivity in the Leading Marketing Journals

“…Finally, we examined the influence of gender on publication productivity in the leading marketing journals. Our findings are contrary to those of Prpic (2002) and others (e.g., Over 1982;Rogers and Maranto 1989), who show that, on average, female scholars were less productive than their male counterparts. Rather, our findings are consistent with those from the field of management (see Park and Gordon 1996;Williamson and Cable 2003), in which gender was not found to be a significant determinant of publication productivity in the context of marketing scholars.…”

Predicting early career research productivity: the case of management faculty

“…A person's previous success at performing a task enhances his or her skill level and self-efficacy in that realm, increasing both the desirability of pursing and the probability of competently repeating that behavior (Mael, 1991). Thus, pre-appointment research productivity (i.e., graduate student publishing record) may be construed as a signal about research ability levels and goals, such that individuals who successfully publish journal articles or have conference papers accepted for presentations during their doctoral programme should continue to be productive at these tasks over the first six years of their faculty career (Park & Gordon, 1996;Rodgers & Maranto, 1989). Thus, we hypothesize:…”

Putting upward influence strategies in context

“…With the exception of exchange tactics, the proposed pattern of tactic±strategy relationships was as expected. Based on both theory and these results, a best-®t model (Rodgers and Maranto, 1989) was estimated. Assertiveness, coalition, and upward appeal were speci®ed to load together on a higher-order hard factor, ingratiation and exchange represented a soft higher-order latent factor, and tactics of rationality represented a free-standing rational strategy.…”