A review of a decade’s scholarly publications (2004–2013) in the <i>South African Journal of Industrial Psychology</i>

Abstract

Orientation: Publishing methodologically sound, empirically based studies in reputable accredited scientific journals are essential in order to advance knowledge and evidence-based practice in the field of industrial and organisational psychology.Research purpose: The purpose of the research was to conduct a broad content analysis of the articles published in the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology (SAJIP) between 2004 and 2013. The study aimed to provide a descriptive overview of the most frequent content themes,published authors and institutions, research approaches, strategies, designs and analysis techniques, software packages and sample sizes in industrial and organisational (I-O) psychology utilised in the publications.Motivation for study: The periodic analyses of published content in scholarly journals provide an index of the extent to which the publications reflect the scope of practice in a given discipline and broaden insight into the direction and relevance of research published in a journal.Research design, approach and method: A broad systematic content analysis was conducted of 342 documented articles published in the SAJIP between 2004 and 2013. Descriptive data(frequencies and percentages) were used to report the findings.Main findings: The publishing pattern of the SAJIP appeared to correspond with its focus and scope. Manuscripts utilising mostly cross-sectional quantitative correlational research designs with large samples (n &gt; 201) were published in the SAJIP. The University of Johannesburg and Professor Sebastiaan (Ian) Rothmann were the largest contributors to publications between 2004 and 2013. Organisational psychology and psychometrics were the most prominent domains in I-O psychology research. Data were predominantly processed utilising SPSS.Practical implications: The insights derived from the findings can be employed to plan future research initiatives in the field of I-O psychology.Contribution/value-add: The findings provide valuable insight into the current status of the foci of I-O psychology research as published in the SAJIP between 2004 and 2013 and the contribution made by the SAJIP to advancing knowledge and evidence-based practice in I-O psychology.

The Use of Research Methods in Psychological Research: A Systematised Review

“…With regard to the methods used, our data stayed true to literature, finding only common research methods (Grant and Booth, 2009;Maree, 2016) that varied in the degree to which they were employed. Quantitative research was found to be the most popular method, as indicated by literature (Breen and Darlaston-Jones, 2010;Counsell and Harlow, 2017) and previous studies in specific areas of psychology (see Coetzee and Van Zyl, 2014). Its long history as the first research method (Leech et al, 2007) in the field of psychology as well as researchers' current application of mathematical approaches in their studies (Toomela, 2010) might contribute to its popularity today.…”

“…Studies such as Lee et al ( 1999 ) as well as Bluhm et al ( 2011 ) review of qualitative methods has attempted to synthesis the use of research methods and indicated the growth of qualitative research in American and European journals. Research has also focused on the use of research methods in specific sub-disciplines of psychology, for example, in the field of Industrial and Organisational psychology Coetzee and Van Zyl ( 2014 ) found that South African publications tend to consist of cross-sectional quantitative research methods with underrepresented longitudinal studies. Qualitative studies were found to make up 21% of the articles published from 1995 to 2015 in a similar study by O'Neil and Koekemoer ( 2016 ).…”

Positive Psychological Coaching Definitions and Models: A Systematic Literature Review

“…Third, to increase the trustworthiness of the thematic content analyses and the coding process, the data was independently analyzed by the co-ordinating author and one of the authors for each of the two separate sections (definition and model). Here open communication between the co-ordinating author and the three co-authors persisted throughout the analysis process (Coetzee and van Zyl, 2014). Disagreements in the coding process were discussed between the two coders until it was resolved.…”

Debating the scientific credibility of industrial and organisational psychology: A rebuttal

“…For 45 years, the South African Journal of Industrial Psychology (SAJIP) has been at the vanguard of the struggle to advance industrial and organisational psychology (IOP) as a discipline within South Africa (Coetzee & Van Zyl, 2014Raubenheimer, 1994). Since its inception in 1974, under the editorships of Proffs.…”