Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T16:17:34.668Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The structure of mental health research: networks of influence among psychiatry and clinical psychology journals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2011

N. Haslam  and
D. Lusher
N. Haslam*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
D. Lusher
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
*
*Address for correspondence: Professor N. Haslam, Department of Psychology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia. (Email: nhaslam@unimelb.edu.au)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Psychiatry and clinical psychology are the two dominant disciplines in mental health research, but the structure of scientific influence and information flow within and between them has never been mapped.

Method

Citations among 96 of the highest impact psychiatry and clinical psychology journals were examined, based on 10 052 articles published in 2008. Network analysis explored patterns of influence between journal clusters.

Results

Psychiatry journals tended to have greater influence than clinical psychology journals, and their influence was asymmetrical: clinical psychology journals cited psychiatry journals at a much higher rate than the reverse. Eight journal clusters were found, most dominated by a single discipline. Their citation network revealed an influential central cluster of ‘core psychiatry’ journals that had close affinities with a ‘psychopharmacology’ cluster. A group of ‘core clinical psychology’ journals was linked to a ‘behavior therapy’ cluster but both were subordinate to psychiatry journals. Clinical psychology journals were less integrated than psychiatry journals, and ‘health psychology/behavioral medicine’ and ‘neuropsychology’ clusters were relatively peripheral to the network.

Conclusions

Scientific publication in the mental health field is largely organized along disciplinary lines, and is to some degree hierarchical, with clinical psychology journals tending to be structurally subordinate to psychiatry journals.

Keywords

Bibliometricscitationsclinical psychologynetwork analysispsychiatry
Type
Original Articles
Information
Psychological Medicine , Volume 41 , Issue 12 , December 2011 , pp. 2661 - 2668
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Batagelj, V, Mrvar, A (2010). Pajek (Version 2.00). University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.Google Scholar
Bavelas, A (1950). Communication patterns in task-oriented groups. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 22, 723–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borgatti, SP, Everrett, MG, Freeman, LC (2002). UCINET 6 for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Analytic Technologies: Cambridge.Google Scholar
Boyack, KW, Klavans, R, Borner, K (2005). Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics 64, 351–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cason, H, Lubotsky, M (1936). The influence and dependence of psychological journals on each other. Psychological Bulletin 33, 95–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clement, S, Singh, SP, Burns, T (2003). Status of bipolar disorder research: bibliometric study. British Journal of Psychiatry 182, 148–152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freeman, LC (1979). Centrality in social networks: conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1, 215–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López-Muñoz, F, Alamo, C, Quintero-Gutiérrez, FJ, García-García, P (2000 a). A bibliometric study of international scientific productivity in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder covering the period 1980–2005. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 17, 381–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López-Muñoz, F, García-García, P, Saiz-Ruiz, J, Mezzich, J, Rubio, G, Vieta, E, Alamo, C (2008 b). A bibliometric study of the use of the classification and diagnostic system in psychiatry over the last 25 years. Psychopathology 41, 214–225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McHugh, PR, Slavney, PR (1998). The Perspectives of Psychiatry, 2nd edn.Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pingitore, DP, Scheffler, RM, Sentell, T, West, JC (2002). Comparison of psychiatrists and psychologists in clinical practice. Psychiatric Services 53, 977–984.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinski, G, Narin, F (1979). Structure of the psychological literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 30, 161–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schindler, FE, Berren, MR, Beigel, A (1981). A study of the causes of conflict between psychiatrists and psychologists. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 32, 263–266.Google Scholar
Theander, SS, Wetterberg, L (2010). Schizophrenia in Medline 1950–2006: a bibliometric investigation. Schizophrenia Research 118, 279–284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wasserman, S, Faust, K (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, HC, Boorman, SA, Breiger, RL (1976). Social structure from multiple networks. I. Block models of roles and positions. American Journal of Sociology 81, 730–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyatt, RC, Livson, N (1994). The not so great divide? Psychologists and psychiatrists take stands on the medical and psychosocial models of mental illness. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 25, 120–131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, YJ, Chiu, CY (2009). Mapping the structure and dynamics of psychological knowledge: forty years of APA journal citations (1970–2009). Review of General Psychology 13, 349–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar