Scholarly accomplishments: a United States survey of academic psychologists

The present study examined rates of scholarly productivity amongst academic psychologists in the United States, including annual peer-reviewed publication rate, normative rates per year of conference presentations and book chapters as well as the average amount of annual grant monies. Psychology faculty at 4-year or higher institutions in the United States were recruited via an email invitation, resulting in 1,214 participants. Participants were examined according to their institutions' Carnegie Classification. The largest observed group in our sample were from master's Colleges and Universities: Larger Programs, M1 category, (N = 350; 28.83%), whereas the smallest observed group were from baccalaureate Colleges: Diverse Fields, B/DF category, (N = 47; 3.87%). Results indicated a significant effect of Carnegie Classification on rates of scholarly productivity, such that faculty at R1 and R2 institutions outperformed all other Carnegie Classifications on all measures. In addition, faculty at R1 institutions outperformed faculty at R2 institutions on all measures except for conference presentations. Given that scholarly output is used as an indicator in tenure and promotion processes, the present study provides essential reference information for academic psychologists in the United States.