{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029229406554472984, 'fraction_numerical': 0.022143489813994686, 'mean_word_length': 5.420454545454546, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Research Productivity in Select Psychology Journals, 1986–2008

ABSTRACT Examination of research productivity has a long history in psychology. Journals across psychology have periodically published research-productivity studies. An analysis of institutional research productivity was conducted for 17 journals published by the American Psychological Association for the years 1986–2008. This analysis implemented two methodologies: one a replication and extension of G. S. Howard, D. A. Cole, and S. E. Maxwell's (1987) method, the other a new method designed to give credit to psychology departments rather than only overall institutions. A system of proportional credit assured all articles with multiple institutions received credit. Results show that for the 23-year period, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign was ranked 1st, followed by the University of California, Los Angeles, and the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Overall, results showed both consistency and change across all journals examined. The authors explore the implications of these findings in the context of the current academic environment.