Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to investigate methods of measuring individual research productivity for counseling psychologists. Using the 60 members of the Journal of Counseling Psychology editorial board, the authors computed a comparison of 6 popular indices of productivity, revealing considerable levels of positive skewness, kurtosis, and overlap with each other. Combining the strengths of the 6 indices, the authors developed a new productivity index entitled the Integrated Research Productivity Index (IRPI). The IRPI measures individual productivity by statistically combining an individual's author-weighted publications, average times cited by other publications, and years since first publication into a comprehensive score. Productivity values and IRPI scores for 3 groups of counseling psychologists (Tyler Award recipients, Kuder Award recipients, and Division 17 Presidents) were computed to provide evidence of discriminant validity among the indices. In contrast to the other measures examined, the IRPI accounts for productivity per year and years in the field and assesses mean citation count per article as opposed to total citation count, thus yielding similar scores for Tyler (lifetime) and Kuder (early career) research award recipients. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
