2004-05: Faculty Salaries in Graduate Departments of Psychology
Marlene Wicherski, Tamara Washington, Jessica Kohout, and Jill Bohacik
APA Center for Workforce Studies
Surveys of faculty salaries in graduate departments of psychology have been conducted since the mid-1960s, first by the council of Graduate Departments of Psychology (COGDOP), and after 1978 by the American Psychological Association (APA) in conjunction with COGDOP. Subsequent years saw the survey broaden in scope to cover more diverse issues concerning graduate education, and in 1990 it was divided into two separate components, with the initial phase of the survey addressing faculty salaries and the second covering other topics. More recently that second portion was folded in with the ongoing Graduate Study effort. This has been accomplished by modifying the Graduate Study instrument.
In September, 2004, the Survey of Faculty Salaries in Graduate Departments of Psychology was mailed to 660 U.S. and Canadian graduate departments of psychology. Eligible departments were drawn from the current edition of Graduate Study in Psychology (APA, 2005) and prior editions, and from the membership of the National Council of Schools and Programs of Professional Psychology (NCSPP). The questionnaire requested information on demographics, employment status, rank, years in rank, highest degree and year awarded, and salary for all faculty members. Departments that had not yet returned completed forms were sent a final reminder by electronic mail in late December.
Of the 660 departments and professional schools surveyed, 239 provided at least some usable information, for an overall repsonse rate of 36.2%. Data presented in this report are based on 4,703 faculty who hold doctorates, who are employed full time, and for whom the relevant data were available. Included in this total are 3.566 faculty in 170 U.S. doctoral departments, 790 faculty in 58 U.S. master's departments, and 347 faculty in 11 Canadian departments.
Consistent with previous efforts, response rates varied considerably, depending on the geographic location of the institution, the highest degree offered by the department (doctoral or master's), whether the institution is public or private, and the department type. Substantially higher levels of repsonse were obtained in the U.S. for doctoral departments (40.9%) than for master's departments (26.9%). Departments in the U.S. overall were slightly less likely than other types of academic units (e.g., professional schools or eductaional psychology departments to provide data. More information on specific response rates can be found in Appendix Table A.
Structure of the Report
Results are presented separately for (1) U.S. doctoral departments; (2) U.S. master's departments; and (3) Canadian departments. For U.S. doctoral departments, salaries are broken out along the following dimensions: geographic region, public or private institution status, and type of department (e.g., psychology, professional school of psychology, or human development). Among master's departments, the majority of participants were psychology departments; thus detailed analyses have been limited to this category. No master's-level departments in Canada participated in the survey this year.
Most salaries are reported acording to academic rank and years in rank, or by years since earning the doctorate. Additional tables report salaries paid to chairs, other administrative positions, and newly hired faculty, changes averaged over the past three years, and a comparison of salaries paid to men and women of equivalent years in rank. The final table presents average amounts paid to adjunct or other part-time faculty who are compensated on a per-course basis.
Readers of this report should consider possible error introduced by nonresponse. Comparisons of respondents with nonrespondents indicated few marked differences in terms of the geographic distribution for U.S. doctoral departments overall and doctoral psychology departments, in particular. However, the repsonse rate was lower for U.S. master's departments and for departments in Canada. Thus, in reading the results, it is important to consult Appendix A for the appropriate rate of response.
Several tables report percent changes in average salaries over the past two years. These percentages are discussed in both monetary terms (as measured in current dollars) and in real terms (those that have been adjusted for inflation rates reported by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the national statistical agency of Canada, Canada Statistics). It is important to note that these percentage changes are based on salary data reported by departments that responded to the survey for the respective years; they are not based on changes in faculty salaries computed on an individual basis. Thus, they are subject to the error that may be introduced by a slightly different set of departments responding to each survey.
Readers should also note that the term "Graduate Departments of Psychology" is meant broadly to encompass departments, schools, interdisciplinary programs, or other academic units listed in recent editions of Graduate Study in Psychology as offering a graduate degree in one or more areas of psychology. Departments may be called any of the following: (a) psychology; (b) educational psychology; (c) counseling psychology; (d) human development; (e) professional school; (f) counseling, guidance and counselor education; (g) school psychology; (h) education; or (i) other, but these department names are not synonymous with program areas. For example, a program in counseling or school psychology may be found in any of several categories. Almost two thirds of the departments award degrees in multiple areas of psychology. The remaining third tend to be departments that are specialized, offering degrees in a few closely related subfields. Thus, "graduate departments of psychology" refers to any academic unit that offers one or more graduate degrees in psychology.
|Appendix B:||States Comprising Geographic Regions in the United States (PDF, 17KB)|
Notes to Tables
Medians, quartiles, means, and standard deviations are reported for the majority of analyses. The median may be the most useful measure of central tendency since it is less influenced by extreme values than the arithmetic mean. In most of the tables, both median and mean salaries are presented; observed differences reflect the skewness in the distributions.
No statistics are provided where the N is less than 10 or where the standard deviation is 0. In these instances, only the N is provided.
Statistics also were not provided when the number of responding departments was 1 or when the Ns for subgroups based on rank and years in rank were so small that aggregate statistics would not be meaningful.
The majority of tables report salaries for faculty in U.S. graduate departments of psychology on a 9–10–month basis. Some departments (e.g., professional schools of psychology and departments of psychology in medical schools), however, typically operate on an 11–12–month academic calendar. In these cases, the 9–10–month salaries can be converted to their 11–12–month equivalents by multiplying by 11/9.
Faculty Salaries in U.S. Doctoral Departments of Psychology
Faculty Salaries in U.S. Master's Departments of Psychology
Faculty Salaries in Canadian Graduate Departments of Psychology
Other Salaries and Benefits for Specific Faculty Positions in U.S. and Canadian Graduate Departments of Psychology
The annual Survey of Graduate Departments of Psychology is conducted with the active support, counsel and cooperation of the Council of Graduate Departments of Psychology and its Executive Board. This report is prepared by the Research Office, within APA's Central Programs. We gratefully acknowledge the continued support of Dr. Norman B. Anderson, Executive Vice-President and Chief Executive Officer of the APA, and Dr. Michael Honaker, Deputy Chief Executive and Chief Operating Officer.
We are also thankful to Brittany Hart for assistance with the survey mailings.
Finally, each department chair who participated in this year's survey deserves special acknowledgement. Without their cooperation in completing the questionnaire, this report would not be possible.