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

Abstract

The institutional affiliation of each author was tabulated 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 Veterans Administration facilities. The data are summarized for the formative years of the journal (Volumes 1-8), the period of transition to an APA journal (Volumes 9-16), the most recent 8-year period (Volumes 17-24), and the first 24 years of publication. The data are also tabulated for the 4 latest volumes (21-24) in order to obtain a clearer picture of 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 preceived prestige of the institution is also investigated.

Racial/Ethnic Minority Vocational Research: A Content and Trend Analysis Across 36 Years

“…Another potential limitation was the method used to calculate institutional productivity. Because of the number of articles in our analyses, we decided not to take into account articles that may have been based on the dissertations and theses of authors who completed their research at one institution, then moved to another institution prior to publishing their work, as was done by Tinsley and Tinsley (1979) and Perez et al (2000). This may have resulted in some institutions receiving less credit and others more credit than would have been awarded if our calculations were done differently.…”

The State of GLBT Family Research: An Opportunity to Critically Reflect

“…To determine institutional credit, the equation utilized by Tinsley and Tinsley (1979), Perez, Constantine, and Gerard (2000), and Smith (2010) was employed. Each article has a total of 1.00 credits.…”

“…Using the weighting system devised by Tinsley and Tinsley (1979), and employed by Perez and colleagues (2000) and Smith (2010), Clark University (CU) had the most GLBT family research productivity from 2002 up to and including 2012. CU accumulated a sum total of 8.91 credits, accomplishing this with both various ordinally positioned authorships.…”

The 2006 Leona Tyler Award Address

“…In a content analysis of institutional contributions to the Journal of Counseling Psychology (JCP) conducted by Tinsley and Tinsley in 1979, UCSB was not ranked among the top contributors. By 1983, however, UCSB was ranked 10th (Howard, 1983), and in 1994, UCSB had moved up in rank to 6th (Delgado & Howard, 1994).…”