Comment: College Catalogues and Industrial Psychology

• Published in: The American psychologist 1953-05, Vol.8 (5), p.202-203
• Main Author: Paterson, Donald G
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Colleges; Educational Program Evaluation; Graduate Psychology Education; Human; Industrial and Organizational Psychologists; Industrial and Organizational Psychology
• ISSN: 0003-066X; 1935-990X
• DOI: 10.1037/h0056888

Comments on the article by A. Poruben, Jr. ("Analysis of industrial psychology courses," American Psychologist, 1953, 8, 50-52), who purports to present "interesting and valuable" information concerning the training of industrial psychologists through an analysis of college catalogues. He assumed that "a college offering the doctorate in industrial psychology should give adequate training in five areas--industrial, statistics, psychometrics, research methodology, and guidance." He then studied college catalogues and tallied the number of semester hours given by the psychology department in each of these areas and then gave a rank order to the 30 colleges. By this means, the University of Minnesota ranks 27.5 and the University of Michigan, for example, ranks 1. The unwary might think that Minnesota minimizes training in industrial psychology. According to the current author, the truth is, perhaps, nearer the exact opposite. The Minnesota doctoral program in industrial psychology could not be described by a study of the psychology department courses as listed in the catalogue. It would be revealed, however, in a study of the transcripts of Minnesota graduates who, in increasing number, are now earning their living as industrial psychologists. The point is that the Minnesota department relies on three other departments for advanced training in mathematical statistics, on two other departments for training in psychometrics, and on four other departments for training in production management, time and motion study, scientific management, personnel management, and industrial relations. A study of the department of psychology offerings per se would not reveal the interdepartmental and interdisciplinary character of the training available and utilized in producing industrial psychologists. It is argued that a better approach than a study of college catalogues would be to study the output of colleges as exemplified by the numbers of persons contributing to the literature or actually working as industrial psychologists.