Relationship of vocational personality and research training environment to the research productivity of counseling psychologists.

Krebs, Peter J.; Smither, James W.; Hurley, Robert B.

doi:10.1037/0735-7028.22.5.362

Cited by 55 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Conversely, some students with a high level previous research experience and interest develop more negative attitudes toward the model while in training if they feel research is over-emphasized at the expense of their clinical interests. The results of this study, particularly the manner in which the data concerning the student's interest (their VPI and SPI scores) related to their experience of training, appear consistent with investigations which have examined the interaction between person and environment variables in determining graduate student research interesdproductivity (Krebs et al, 1991;Mallinckrodt et al, 1990).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

“…Areas of inquiry have included features of training environments which influence attitudes toward research (Galassi, Brooks, Stoltz, & Trexler, 1986;Gelso, Raphael, Black, Rardin, & Skalkos, 1983;Royalty & Magoon, 1985;Royalty & Reising, 1986;Wampold, 1986), personality characteristics of graduate students that are related to research interests (Betz & Taylor, 1982) and the relationship between training environment influence and personality characteristics in shaping attitudes toward research (Krebs, Smithner, & Hurley, 1991;Mallinckrodt, Gelso, & Royalty, 1990). Research suggests that certain features of training environments, such as the involvement of students in research at early points in their training and an emphasis on philosophy of science (Galassi et al, 1986), as well as the participation in research teams (Gelso et al, 1983) are related to students' positive view of research production.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Graduate psychology students' perceptions of the scientist-practitioner model of training

Aspenson

Gersh

Perot

et al. 1993

Counselling Psychology Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since its inception over forty years ago, there has been considerable controversy regarding the viability of the scientist-practitioner model for training professional psychologists. The present study utilized a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods to assess graduate psychology students ' (n = 24) perceptions of this training model. Counselling, clinical, and school psychology students participated in semi-structured interviews and were administered the Vocational Preference Inventory, Form B (Holland, 1977) and the Scientist-Practitioner Invent0 y (Leong Q Zachar, 1991). Data were analyzed using a combination of grounded theory (Glaser Q Strauss, 1967) and additional qualitative data analytic approaches (Miles Q Huberman, 1984). A number of patterns were observed between students' perceptions and feelings about the scientist-practitioner model and their definition of science, career interests, and shaping experiences. Implications for the future training of professional psychologists are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Graduate psychology students' perceptions of the scientist-practitioner model of training

Aspenson

Gersh

Perot

et al. 1993

Counselling Psychology Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More productive graduate students in psychology tend to have higher levels of research self-efficacy, greater research interest, more optimism regarding the product of their research efforts, more early experiences with research, greater investigative career interests, and more publications early in their careers (Kahn 2001;Kahn and Scott 1997). Productivity for psychologists in faculty positions has been predicted by pre-position productivity, doctoral program prestige, professional commitment, research ability, and investigative interests (Jauch et al 1978;Judge et al 2004;Krebs et al 1991;Rodgers and Maranto 1989;Royalty and Magoon 1985;Williamson and Cable 2003). For both groups, however, relations among these variables and productivity have been relatively weak.…”

Section: Empirical Studies On Productivitymentioning

confidence: 96%

“…But what can be said about what makes academics productive, apart from type of article published (Judge et al 2007)? These types of studies are indeed rare, and even those that have been completed have only been able to account for a small amount of amount variance in productivity (Jauch et al 1978;Judge et al 2004;Krebs et al 1991;Rodgers and Maranto …”

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 98%

The research productivity of academic psychologists: assessment, trends, and best practice recommendations

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research productivity affects the careers of academic psychologists. Unfortunately, there is a surprising lack of consensus on productivity's meaning, measurement, and how to compare the productivity of one academic psychologist to another. In the present study, we review academic productivity research within psychology, and using a sample of 673 psychologists, compute six indexes of productivity. Most productivity metrics (publication count, citation count, or some combination of the two) were substantially interrelated and one (Integrated Research Productivity Index) was independent from years in the field. Female psychologists were equally as productive as male psychologists after accounting for years in the field, and pre-tenure psychologists showed steeper change-over-time productivity slopes than post-tenure psychologists. Based on these findings, we provide recommendations for the use and measurement of academic research productivity.

show abstract

“…In an analysis of counseling graduate students, Phillips and Russell (1994) found a positive correlation between perceptions of the research training environment (PRTE) and research productivity (RP) only among a subsample of advanced graduate students. Finally, in an analysis of Ph.D. level counseling psychologists, Krebs, Smither, and Hurley (1991) investigated potential influences of interests on research productivity (using Holland's Vocational Preference Inventory, 1985, and the Research Training Environment Scale (Royalty, Gelso, Mallinckrodt, & Garrett, 1986). Investigative interests were positively related to research productivity, whereas social interests were negatively related to research productivity.…”

Section: Interests As Predictor Numerous Studies Have Demonstrated Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Noncognitive Constructs and Other Background Variables in Graduate Education

Kyllonen

Walters²,

Kaufman

2011

ETS Research Report Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report reviews the literature on noncognitive and other background predictors (e.g., personality, attitudes, and interests) as it pertains to graduate education. The first section reviews measures typically used in studies of graduate school outcomes, such as attrition and time to degree. A review of qualities faculty members and administrators say they desire and cultivate in graduate programs is conducted. There appears to be a divergence between the qualities faculty members say are important and the measures researchers typically use in validity studies.The second section reviews three categories of noncognitive variables that might predict outcomes (general personality factors, quasi-cognitive factors, and attitudinal factors) and the definitions, measures, correlates, and the validity of those measures. The role of background factors, both environmental and group, is part of this review.Key words: noncognitive, personality, admissions, GRE ® , selection, assessment, new constructs ii Executive SummaryMany GRE ® studies conducted in the past several years have asked faculty members about the qualities that are important to success in graduate school. A consistent finding is that graduate faculty members believe that noncognitive factors, such as motivation, creativity, personality, interests, and attitude, ought to be considered in graduate admissions (e.g., Briel et al., 2000). Many faculty members believe that including such factors would increase both fairness and the validity of the current admissions process. At the same time there is a lack of knowledge about what the scientific literature says on what the noncognitive factors are, how important they are, how they could best be measured, and on whether it might be practical to use them in admissions decisions. The purpose of this review is to address these questions. This report reviews various noncognitive factors and definitions, measures, correlates, and the validity of those measures. Graduate School Outcomes and Their DeterminantsA notional path model illustrates the relationships between noncognitive predictor factors and graduate school outcome factors. Graduate school outcome factors are divided into traditional measures of convenience and performance factors. Traditional measures are attrition, time-to-degree, and grade point average. Performance factors are domain proficiency, general proficiency, communication, effort, discipline, teamwork, leadership, and management. The noncognitive predictor factors are divided into three main categories: personality (e.g., extroversion), quasi-cognitive (e.g., metacognition), and motivation factors (e.g., self-efficacy).In addition, there are two background categories assumed to affect the noncognitive factors:environmental (e.g., mentor support) and group factors (gender and ethnicity). The review is organized according to this model. Personality FactorsA consensus has emerged within the field that there are five major personality factors: extroversion, emotional stability, agreeableness, ...

show abstract

Relationship of vocational personality and research training environment to the research productivity of counseling psychologists.

Cited by 55 publications

References 34 publications

Graduate psychology students' perceptions of the scientist-practitioner model of training

Graduate psychology students' perceptions of the scientist-practitioner model of training

The research productivity of academic psychologists: assessment, trends, and best practice recommendations

The Role of Noncognitive Constructs and Other Background Variables in Graduate Education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About