An alternate look at educational psychologist’s productivity from 1991 to 2002

• Published in: Contemporary educational psychology Vol. 29; no. 3; pp. 333 - 343
• Main Authors: Hsieh, Pei-Hsuan, Acee, Taylor, Chung, Wen-Hung, Hsieh, Ya-Ping, Kim, Hyunjin, Thomas, Greg D., You, Ji-in, Robinson, Daniel H.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: San Diego, CA Elsevier Inc 01.07.2004; Elsevier
• Subjects: Authors; Biological and medical sciences; Educational Psychology; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Graduate Students; Miscellaneous; Productivity; Psychologists; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychology. Psychophysiology; Human; Productivity; Published document; Psychologist; School psychology; Bibliometrics
• ISSN: 0361-476X; 1090-2384
• DOI: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.03.002

Previous investigations of the productivity of educational psychologists ( Smith et al., 1998, 2003) have used a points system that defines high productivity as having few co-authors and high authorship placement. Due to the increasingly collaborative nature of educational psychology research ( Robinson, McKay, Katayama, & Fan, 1998), defining productivity in this way may not fully capture the essence of our work nor provide the most useful information for potential graduate students. In taking a closer look at the most-published persons in educational psychology journals from 1991 to 2002, we found that most also published even more articles in other journals and regularly included co-authors, especially graduate students. Some persons, who have not been recognized as being the most productive in the Smith et al. lists, published considerably more articles than others who have appeared in those lists.