© 2007 American Psychological Association. Published by Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the American Psychological Association.All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journalsrights@oxon.blackwellpublishing.com

172

Blackwell Publishing IncMalden, USACPSPClinical Psychology: Science and Practice0969-5893© 2007 American Psychological Association. Published by Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the American Psychological Association.XXXCommentary

COMMENTARIES ON STEWART ET AL.CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY: SCIENCE AND PRACTICE • V14 N2, JUNE 2007

C O M M E N T A R I E S

Effects of Scholarly Productivity Expectations

on Graduate Training in Clinical Psychology

MySha R. Whorley and Michael E. Addis, Department of

Psychology, Clark University

We consider the potential upsides and downsides to

expectations for high levels of scholarly productivity

among clinical doctoral students in scientist–practitioner

programs. As expectations for students rise, there is the

potential for considerable growth as scholars. At the

same time, there is the risk that an implicit emphasis on

quantity of published scholarship can detract from other

educational experiences that may ultimately enhance

the quality of scholarly work. We consider this tension

in the context of time management, creativity, motiva-

tion, intellectual risk-taking, and developmental timing

of opportunities to publish scholarship.

Key words:

boulder model, clinical training, program

rankings, science and practice, scientist–practitioner.

[Clin

Psychol Sci Prac 14:

172–174,

2007]

S

cholarly productivity provides one important index ofthe status of a clinical psychology graduate program.Publishing productivity data allows faculty and studentsto compare their research output with other programs,to assess the outcomes of policy and program changes,and to aid developing programs in evaluating theirprogress. These data can also be used by potential faculty

members and graduate students to determine whichschools are ranked higher on indices of publication rates,as one measure of program quality.

It seems reasonable to assume that between-programdifferences in productivity rates are at least moderatelycorrelated with the emphasis different programs placeon scholarly productivity, for both students and faculty.Clearly, there are upsides to placing a strong emphasis onthe quantity of published scholarship. But there are poten-tial downsides as well. We consider some of the potentialupsides and downsides as they might be experienced “onthe ground” by graduate students in programs that placea high emphasis on scholarly productivity. For example,at what point can the pressure to publish overshadowcreativity in formulating research questions and design-ing innovative research? When can the pressure to publishundermine the passion or enthusiasm students feel towardtheir research or toward research in general? At whatpoint does the focus on quantitative measures of produc-tivity begin to affect the development of other criticalprofessional skills? We assume throughout our commen-tary that there are underlying values and goals associatedwith training quality scientist–practitioners. We thenconsider how a strong emphasis on scholarly productivitymight help or hinder students in realizing them throughtheir course of study.

TIME PRESSURE

Graduate school is filled with competing priorities.For many students, one of the most challenging thingsabout beginning graduate school in clinical psychologyis realizing that there is not enough time to learn a lotabout everything. Once this realization hits, studentshave a choice to make. Some choose to learn a modest

Address correspondence to Michael E. Addis, Department ofPsychology, Clark University, 950 Main Street, Worcester, MA01610. E-mail: maddis@clarku.edu.

COMMENTARIES ON STEWART ET AL. 173

amount about a wide range of skills while others decideearly on a specific career path and learn all they canabout the particular skills they might use in that career.Either way, time limitations create pressure for studentsto choose the skills upon which they wish to focus.

Often, students in programs with high research produc-tivity expectations deal with time pressure using one of twostrategies. Some students accept virtually every opportunitypresented to them for fear of missing any chance to refineor add to their skill set. Other students become very guardedwith their time, saying “no” to opportunities that arenonessential for fear of overextending themselves. In theworst case, students can become so focused on meetingthe demands of their program that they begin to sacrificetheir own well-being. In the best case, the pressure topublish in large quantities may help students learn to bemore mindful of how to use their time wisely, a skill thatis adaptive in any professional context.

Productivity expectations also interact with timepressure by prioritizing research above other criticalskills that students are simultaneously trying to develop.For students who come into graduate school committedto pursuing a research career, this pressure can affectthem in two ways. In some cases, students may recognizethe value of early research opportunities and thriveunder the pressure to publish. Other students resent thetime burden that these publication demands place onthem and begin to view research as something that they

have

to do instead of something they

want

to do. In theworst case, extreme productivity pressure can result inlack of enthusiasm for research.

CREATIVITY, RISK-TAKING, AND MOTIVATION

Students’ passion for big ideas can be what drew them tostudy psychology. During the first few months of gradu-ate school, as students are socialized into their new rolesas future clinicians and researchers, they are often encour-aged to narrow their research interests down to small andmanageable projects. In many ways, this is an adaptiveand inevitable process because the “big questions” arerarely, if ever, answerable in a single study. Yet, at thesame time, the very motivation for pursuing graduatestudy, the ability to answer the big questions in ways thatultimately enhance human well-being, may rapidlycome to feel inaccessible to students. The danger here isthat students with a passion for the big ideas and creative

methodologies may begin to lose enthusiasm. Add tothis a programmatic expectation of high research produc-tivity and the result can be a relatively narrow and for-mulaic research idea.

Whether students maintain their enthusiasm has a lotto do with the culture of the psychology program inwhich they study. The attitude of the program about therole of creative risk-taking in research goes a long way indetermining whether students can maintain their passionand curiosity as they go through the process of narrow-ing down their interests into manageable projects. Pro-grams that convey an attitude of acceptance and supportto their students can often encourage them to take somecalculated academic risks. These risks may include studyingimportant but controversial scientific topics, utilizingnontraditional methodologies, or submitting articles totop-tier journals with low acceptance rates. Thus, althoughthe productivity pressure may be similar at two differentprograms, the effects may be different. Program A encouragesstudents to study topics that they are passionate about,to be creative and flexible in how they study them, andto be ambitious in submitting their articles. Program Bpromotes traditional approaches in research topic anddesign, and caution in where and when students submittheir articles in the interest of maximizing the probabilityof publication. Creativity and intellectual risk-taking maybe less a function of productivity pressure only, and morea function of how students perceive the balance ofpressure and support in the academic environment.

TIMING OF SKILL DEVELOPMENT

As productivity expectations in publishing and grantwriting rise at the national level, students in all programsare expected to begin developing the relevant skill setsearlier and earlier in their education. When students areencouraged to begin big writing projects early in theiracademic careers, there is the potential for rapid growthand a sense of accomplishment. The potential downsideis that some of these early endeavors do not result insuccess. For example, students may go through severalrounds of revisions for an article or have it rejected out-right. Although these experiences can set the stage forlearning, many students may be discouraged by earlyrejections. They may begin to feel as though they lackthe ability to be successful at writing or publishing andmay be reluctant to undertake future writing projects. In

CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY: SCIENCE AND PRACTICE • V14 N2, JUNE 2007 174

reality, it may be that rising productivity expectationscan lead students and faculty members to undertakeprojects that are too ambitious at too early a point in thestudent’s scholarly development.

One might consider three factors in determiningwhether a writing opportunity is being presented at adevelopmentally appropriate time. First, will the studentbe able to gain skills that will move him or her forwardin his or her training in some way? For instance, it maynot be developmentally appropriate for students towrite a grant in their first year if they will not be usinggrant-writing skills again until they prepare their disser-tation. Second, does the student have the foundationalskills to succeed in the project? For example, a studentwho has never published before may not have the skillsrequired to take lead authorship on a research article.Other students may have the requisite skills and be readyto take the lead. Third, are others at the same develop-mental level undertaking the same types of projects? Oneway to gauge whether a project is appropriate forstudents at a particular level is to observe what otherstudents at that level are doing. This is not to say thatsome students are not ready for some projects beforeothers, but comparison can often be helpful in deter-mining what is developmentally appropriate.

There are also two variables that may help determinethe outcome of writing and publication projects regard-less of whether they are presented at developmentallyappropriate times. First, is the proper support in place?How available a student’s advisor makes him- or herselfcan be a determining factor in the success of a writingproject at any level. Particularly for beginning students,

having an encouraging advisor is likely to make studentsmore confident in approaching difficult projects, andmore likely to persevere through several drafts. Second,does the student perceive growth or failure in the out-come of the project? Even a developmentally appropriatewriting opportunity with strong mentoring can havenegative effects on a student’s confidence if he or sheperceives the outcome as unsuccessful. On this point,students may at times need help in gaining perspectiveon what constitutes success or failure in publishing.Several revisions of an article might mean failure to afirst-year graduate student while an advisor knows thatthis is par for the course.

Productivity pressure can negatively affect the develop-mental timing of writing projects in at least twoways. First, there may be more opportunities presentedat developmentally inappropriate times in programswith extreme productivity expectations. For instance,if a program expects students to have published sevenarticles in the six years before receiving the doctoraldegree, there is little time for practice before beginningserious research projects. Second, early exposure tounsuccessful opportunities may weed out students who,given the time, could develop into high-quality researchscholars. On the upside, this pressure provides studentswith opportunities to learn and gain confidence early inthe graduate career. Similarly, this “learning in context”approach can work well for those students who find iteasier to acquire skills in the process of accomplishing aconcrete goal.

Received January 10, 2007; accepted January 12, 2007.