David Morgan

Publication Date


Advisor(s) - Committee Chair

John O'Connor, Larry Hanser, Richard Miller


Access granted to WKU students, faculty and staff only.

After an extensive unsuccessful search for the author, this thesis is considered an orphan work, which may be protected by copyright. The inclusion of this orphan work on TopScholar does not guarantee that that orphan work may be used for any purpose and any use of the orphan work may subject the user to a claim of copyright infringement. The reproduction of this work is made by WKU without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage and is made for purposes of preservation and research.

See also WKU Archives - Authorization for Use of Thesis, Special Project & Dissertation

Degree Program

Department of Psychology

Degree Type

Master of Arts


Relationships between faculty research productivity and various organizational correlates across PhD-granting psychology departments were investigated using published ratings of research productivity, information contained in the APA's Graduate Study in Psychology for 1979-1980, and data gathered by telephone interviews with 28 department chairpersons and by questionnaires from 82 department chairpersons. Relationships between variables were analyzed by simple correlation, and by factor analysis of the questionnaire data. The latter method, using a two factor solution, proved most enlightening. Factor I was determined by variables with loadings indicating: greater research productivity; stronger orientation towards research in the department's training program and among the faculty, as well as in the higher administration; a tendency for the department to be older and larger; and by variables indicating the presence of policies easily viewed as designed to promote research, such as reduced teaching loads. Factor II was determined by variables with loadings indicating: a departmental orientation towards the training of applied, practice-centered psychologists; less emphasis within the department and within the higher administration on faculty research activity; more formalized and more frequent faculty evaluation; perhaps fewer resources; and lower productivity ratings. Methodological problems involving limitations of the different measures used in the study are discussed; as are directions for future research, including the need for more concrete information about the differences in behavior and policy across more and less productive departments and their higher administrations.


Psychology | Social and Behavioral Sciences