Published Scholarship on Marital Therapy

Following Gurman (1981), this study reports on authors and topics of interest in prominent marriage and family therapy journals from 1980 through 1995. Fifteen of the 25 institutions that produced the greatest number of authors prior to 1978 continued to be among the top 25 between 1980 and 1995, and the 25 leading institutions produced 29.5% of articles from 1980 to 1995. Most authors held positions in university settings and taught in programs with a marriage and family therapy focus. Clinical issues were the most common focus of articles (61%), and one‐third of all articles were research reports.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sources of Influence and Topic Areas in Family Therapy: Trends in Three Major Journals

Naden¹,

Rasmussen²,

Morrissette³

et al. 1997

“…Following the tradition of Shortz et al. () and the earlier study (DuPree et al., ) we wanted to recognize the most productive faculty members and those newer faculty who have also demonstrated high levels of scholarship. The scholars considered to be most prolific in this study (based on their cumulative publications and h‐index score) include Fred Piercy (Virginia Tech), Jonathan Sandberg (BYU), Natasha Slesnick (Ohio State), Russ Crane (BYU), Jeff Larson (BYU), Rick Miller (BYU), Lenore McWey (Florida State), Sandra Stith (Kansas State), William Doherty (Minnesota), Suzanne Bartle‐Haring (Ohio State), and Adrian Blow (Michigan State).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The earliest study that evaluated MFT-related scholarship and provided ranking information for the field examined the most prominent authors and their institutions across a six-year period (Shortz, Worthington, McCollough, DeVries, & Morrow, 1994). The most productive researchers included Doug Snyder, Susan Johnson, Timothy Ingram, Neil Jacobson, Leslie Greenberg, S. Allen Wilcoxon, and Edward Waring.…”

Section: Mft Ranking Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Scholarship Productivity inCOAMFTE‐Accredited Doctoral Programs: An Update

DuPree

Bean

2018

Scholarly productivity continues to be used as a significant factor when universities make decisions about granting tenure to faculty, allocating resources, and supporting program goals. In 2009, DuPree, White, Meredith, Ruddick, and Anderson reviewed research productivity in faculty from COAMFTE-accredited PhD programs. As an update, the purpose of this article is to re-examine scholarly productivity trends among COAMFTE-accredited doctoral programs through the use of several evaluation methods. Specifically, productivity was examined in the following areas: (a) family therapy journal publications; (b) publications in any type of peer-reviewed journal; (c) h-factor index scores; and (d) historic and recent journal publication trends.

“…In regard to past studies evaluating scholarship productivity within the field of MFT, Shortz, Worthington, McCollough, DeVries, and Morrow (1994a) listed prolific authors and institutions that published marital therapy research over a 6‐year period. Prolific authors included S. Allen Wilcoxon, Susan Johnson, Neil Jacobson, Leslie Greenberg, Timothy Ingram, Edward Waring, and Doug Snyder.…”

Section: Ranking Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Scholarship Productivity in COAMFTE‐Accredited PhD Programs

DuPree

White

Meredith

et al. 2009

Due to an increasing trend among states to cut higher education funds, many universities are relying more on private donations and federal funding to keep programs afloat. Scholarship productivity in general has become an integral factor in terms of universities granting tenure to faculty, allocating resources, and supporting program goals due to the fact that more research in a particular area tends to increase the likelihood that one will obtain funding from federal, state, and private sources. In the past, ranking systems have also been used to evaluate programs. However, most ranking systems use methodologies that do not quantify research productivity or evaluate factors that match current university trends. The purpose of this article is to explore current scholarship productivity trends among COAMFTE-accredited doctoral programs through the use of several evaluation methods. Specifically, productivity was examined in regard to the following areas: (a) family therapy journal publications; (b) family science journal publications; (c) historic journal publication trends; and (d) recent journal publication trends.