大学生发表心理学论文有多普遍?顶尖高校教师简历考试

Collabra Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1525/collabra.84521
Traci A. Giuliano, William I. Hebl, Jennifer L. Howell
{"title":"大学生发表心理学论文有多普遍?顶尖高校教师简历考试","authors":"Traci A. Giuliano, William I. Hebl, Jennifer L. Howell","doi":"10.1525/collabra.84521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite extensive research on the benefits of faculty-undergraduate collaborative research, little is known about the outcomes of such collaborations, such as coauthored publication in peer-reviewed journals. To address this gap, we analyzed faculty curricula vitae from 60 top U.S. institutions (20 primarily undergraduate, 20 masters-granting, and 20 research-intensive) to obtain estimates of the prevalence of faculty-undergraduate coauthored publication in psychology. We sent email requests to 8 randomly-selected faculty members from each psychology department in this top 60 (or to the whole department if they had fewer than 8 members). In total, 157 of 459 faculty contacted (34.2%) responded with their full vita. Our results revealed that a substantial majority of faculty (83.4%) had coauthored at least one paper with an undergraduate, with an average of 7.5 coauthored publications (approximately 2 of which were first authored by an undergraduate). Moreover, these publications involved an average of 12.6 undergraduate coauthors (typically in the 2nd or 3rd author position) and accounted for almost 20% of faculty members’ total publications. We also found that, even controlling for overall productivity, faculty of higher rank and those at primarily undergraduate institutions generally coauthored more undergraduate publications compared to faculty of lower rank and/or at masters-granting and especially research-intensive universities. Finally, an analysis of publication trends over time showed that undergraduate publication is becoming increasingly common in psychology, and that faculty are publishing with undergraduates earlier in their careers. We hope our findings inspire more faculty to publish with their undergraduate students.","PeriodicalId":93422,"journal":{"name":"Collabra","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Common Is Undergraduate Publication in Psychology? An Examination of Faculty Vitae From Top Colleges and Universities\",\"authors\":\"Traci A. Giuliano, William I. Hebl, Jennifer L. Howell\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/collabra.84521\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Despite extensive research on the benefits of faculty-undergraduate collaborative research, little is known about the outcomes of such collaborations, such as coauthored publication in peer-reviewed journals. To address this gap, we analyzed faculty curricula vitae from 60 top U.S. institutions (20 primarily undergraduate, 20 masters-granting, and 20 research-intensive) to obtain estimates of the prevalence of faculty-undergraduate coauthored publication in psychology. We sent email requests to 8 randomly-selected faculty members from each psychology department in this top 60 (or to the whole department if they had fewer than 8 members). In total, 157 of 459 faculty contacted (34.2%) responded with their full vita. Our results revealed that a substantial majority of faculty (83.4%) had coauthored at least one paper with an undergraduate, with an average of 7.5 coauthored publications (approximately 2 of which were first authored by an undergraduate). Moreover, these publications involved an average of 12.6 undergraduate coauthors (typically in the 2nd or 3rd author position) and accounted for almost 20% of faculty members’ total publications. We also found that, even controlling for overall productivity, faculty of higher rank and those at primarily undergraduate institutions generally coauthored more undergraduate publications compared to faculty of lower rank and/or at masters-granting and especially research-intensive universities. Finally, an analysis of publication trends over time showed that undergraduate publication is becoming increasingly common in psychology, and that faculty are publishing with undergraduates earlier in their careers. We hope our findings inspire more faculty to publish with their undergraduate students.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93422,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Collabra\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Collabra\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.84521\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Collabra","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.84521","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管对教师与本科生合作研究的好处进行了广泛的研究,但对这种合作的结果知之甚少,例如在同行评议的期刊上共同发表论文。为了解决这一差距,我们分析了美国60所顶尖大学(20所主要是本科生,20所授予硕士学位,20所研究密集型大学)的教师简历,以估计教师与本科生合著的心理学出版物的流行程度。我们从排名前60位的每个心理学系随机选择了8名教师(如果少于8人,则向整个系发送电子邮件)。在我们联系的459名教师中,总共有157名(34.2%)回复了他们的完整简历。我们的研究结果显示,绝大多数教师(83.4%)与本科生合作撰写了至少一篇论文,平均发表了7.5篇论文(其中约2篇是由本科生首次发表的)。此外,这些出版物平均涉及12.6名本科生共同作者(通常位于第二或第三作者位置),几乎占教职员工总出版物的20%。我们还发现,即使控制整体生产力,与排名较低和/或硕士授予大学,特别是研究密集型大学的教师相比,排名较高的教师和主要本科院校的教师通常共同撰写了更多的本科出版物。最后,对一段时间以来出版趋势的分析表明,本科生发表论文在心理学领域正变得越来越普遍,而且教师在他们职业生涯的早期就与本科生一起发表论文。我们希望我们的发现能激励更多的教师和他们的本科生一起发表文章。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How Common Is Undergraduate Publication in Psychology? An Examination of Faculty Vitae From Top Colleges and Universities
Despite extensive research on the benefits of faculty-undergraduate collaborative research, little is known about the outcomes of such collaborations, such as coauthored publication in peer-reviewed journals. To address this gap, we analyzed faculty curricula vitae from 60 top U.S. institutions (20 primarily undergraduate, 20 masters-granting, and 20 research-intensive) to obtain estimates of the prevalence of faculty-undergraduate coauthored publication in psychology. We sent email requests to 8 randomly-selected faculty members from each psychology department in this top 60 (or to the whole department if they had fewer than 8 members). In total, 157 of 459 faculty contacted (34.2%) responded with their full vita. Our results revealed that a substantial majority of faculty (83.4%) had coauthored at least one paper with an undergraduate, with an average of 7.5 coauthored publications (approximately 2 of which were first authored by an undergraduate). Moreover, these publications involved an average of 12.6 undergraduate coauthors (typically in the 2nd or 3rd author position) and accounted for almost 20% of faculty members’ total publications. We also found that, even controlling for overall productivity, faculty of higher rank and those at primarily undergraduate institutions generally coauthored more undergraduate publications compared to faculty of lower rank and/or at masters-granting and especially research-intensive universities. Finally, an analysis of publication trends over time showed that undergraduate publication is becoming increasingly common in psychology, and that faculty are publishing with undergraduates earlier in their careers. We hope our findings inspire more faculty to publish with their undergraduate students.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Having a Positive Attitude or Doing Good Deeds? An Experimental Investigation of Poker Players’ Responses to the Gambling Fallacies Measure The Association Between Smokers’ Approach Bias and Heaviness of Use: A Focus on Light Smokers The Interplay of Time-of-day and Chronotype Results in No General and Robust Cognitive Boost Individual Difference Correlates of Being Sexually Unrestricted Yet Declining an HIV Test Explaining Why Headlines Are True or False Reduces Intentions to Share False Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1