Correlates of scholarly productivity among counseling psychologists.

Royalty, Georgia M.; MAGOON, THOMAS M.

doi:10.1037/0022-0167.32.3.458

Cited by 52 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More productive graduate students in psychology tend to have higher levels of research self-efficacy, greater research interest, more optimism regarding the product of their research efforts, more early experiences with research, greater investigative career interests, and more publications early in their careers (Kahn 2001;Kahn and Scott 1997). Productivity for psychologists in faculty positions has been predicted by pre-position productivity, doctoral program prestige, professional commitment, research ability, and investigative interests (Jauch et al 1978;Judge et al 2004;Krebs et al 1991;Rodgers and Maranto 1989;Royalty and Magoon 1985;Williamson and Cable 2003). For both groups, however, relations among these variables and productivity have been relatively weak.…”

Section: Empirical Studies On Productivitymentioning

confidence: 96%

The research productivity of academic psychologists: assessment, trends, and best practice recommendations

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research productivity affects the careers of academic psychologists. Unfortunately, there is a surprising lack of consensus on productivity's meaning, measurement, and how to compare the productivity of one academic psychologist to another. In the present study, we review academic productivity research within psychology, and using a sample of 673 psychologists, compute six indexes of productivity. Most productivity metrics (publication count, citation count, or some combination of the two) were substantially interrelated and one (Integrated Research Productivity Index) was independent from years in the field. Female psychologists were equally as productive as male psychologists after accounting for years in the field, and pre-tenure psychologists showed steeper change-over-time productivity slopes than post-tenure psychologists. Based on these findings, we provide recommendations for the use and measurement of academic research productivity.

show abstract

Section: Empirical Studies On Productivitymentioning

confidence: 96%

The research productivity of academic psychologists: assessment, trends, and best practice recommendations

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gelso (1979) proposes that improving research training is the most useful way to increase research performance. Empirical studies show that, compared to doctoral graduates with low learning performance, those with high learning performance are more prepared for getting published (Royalty and Magoon 1985). Thus, those with high learning performance are expected to perform better in research activities.…”

Section: Influential Factors On Drpmentioning

confidence: 97%

What are the major impact factors on research performance of young doctorate holders in science in China: a USTC survey

Vogel

et al. 2010

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Doctoral graduate research performance (DRP) is recognized as one of the most critical indices for evaluation of the success of doctoral education. Doctoral graduates with high research performance directly reflect a higher ability in academic research and academic achievement. Consequently, identifying which factors influence DRP is potentially of great value. This topic is also challenging because of difficulties in identifying the impact factors on research performance and the feasibility of the relative data collection. This paper first examines the relationships between the indicators and DRP. After a review of previous literature, the focus is on the doctoral graduates’ individual factors, advisor factors and learning performance. Data is collected from graduated doctors from the Science Schools of University of Science and Technology of China (USTC). Contrary to expectations, our findings indicate that, based on the Chinese context, learning performance does not appear to be strongly associated with research performance. Individual factors (status of academic origin) do have significant effect on DRP. The advisor factors (including academic status, academic experience and allocation of energy) show a relatively strong association with DRP, in terms of both the number of publications and the impact factor of Science Citation Index (SCI) cited journals

show abstract

“…Both master's-and doctoral-level counseling students train in programs that are based on the science-practitioner model, which emphasizes its research underpinning (Heppner & Anderson, 1985;Tyron, 2002). Yet the lack of enthusiastic research activity among practicing counselors has been the subject of professional concern for the last 2 decades (Lundervold & Belwood, 2000;Robinson, 1994;Royalty & Magoon, 1985). Gladding (2000) noted that counseling students and professionals seem equally unsure about the role of research in their educational and professional lives.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Counselor Educators and Qualitative Research: Affirming a Research Identity

Reisetter

Korcuska

Yexley

et al. 2004

Couns Edu & Supervision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The lack of enthusiastic research activity among counseling professionals has been a subject of professional concern for the last 2 decades. Many graduates of counselor education programs are not connected to academic research and do not establish a research identity. Qualitative research methods have the potential for creating this connection for some students. To increase understanding of the nature and potential usefulness of this paradigm for increasing counselors' connection to academic research, the authors conducted a phenomenological study to investigate the experiences of counselor education doctoral students as they encountered qualitative research. Students' positive responses were summarized as they reflected 4 themes: worldview congruence, theory and skills congruence. research identity and professional viability, and holistic nature of perceptions and experiences.

show abstract

Correlates of scholarly productivity among counseling psychologists.

Abstract: The VPI was developed as a personality inventory 458 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Cited by 52 publications

References 8 publications

The research productivity of academic psychologists: assessment, trends, and best practice recommendations

The research productivity of academic psychologists: assessment, trends, and best practice recommendations

What are the major impact factors on research performance of young doctorate holders in science in China: a USTC survey

Counselor Educators and Qualitative Research: Affirming a Research Identity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About