ArticleResearch integrity and peer review2019
Personally perceived publication pressure: revising the Publication Pressure Questionnaire (PPQ) by using work stress models.
Article in Research integrity and peer review, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- A framework for doctoral education in developing students' mental well-being by integrating the demand and resources of the program: An integrative review.F1000Research · 2023Pooled it
- Latent Profiles of Publication Pressure Among Nurses and Associated Factors: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nursing open · 2026Observational
- Fear of Missing Out in Academic Workers: A Theoretical Framework.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026Article
- Toward contextualized research integrity in higher education: a fuzzy-set analysis of individual and organizational configurations among university faculty.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Mental health in academia: A national survey on risk and protective factors in the Indonesian context.PloS one · 2026Article
- Perceptions of research experience during internal medicine training: insights from a national survey.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Validation of publication pressure questionnaire-revised into Chinese nurses from a university hospital.Nursing open · 2023Article
- Article
- Burnout Profiles Among Young Researchers: A Latent Profile Analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands.F1000Research · 2022Article
- The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on perceived publication pressure among academic researchers in Canada.PloS one · 2022Article
- Explaining variance in perceived research misbehavior: results from a survey among academic researchers in Amsterdam.Research integrity and peer review · 2021Article
- Work-Family Conflict, Enrichment, and Adolescent Academic Adjustment in Dual-Earner Family.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Perceived publication pressure in Amsterdam: Survey of all disciplinary fields and academic ranks.PloS one · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe emphasis on impact factors and the quantity of publications intensifies competition between researchers. This competition was traditionally considered an incentive to produce high-quality work, but there are unwanted side-effects of this competition like publication pressure. To measure the effect of publication pressure on researchers, the Publication Pressure Questionnaire (PPQ) was developed. Upon using the PPQ, some issues came to light that motivated a revision.
methodWe constructed two new subscales based on work stress models using the facet method. We administered the revised PPQ (PPQr) to a convenience sample together with the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) and the Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ). To assess which items best measured publication pressure, we carried out a principal component analysis (PCA). Reliability was sufficient when Cronbach's alpha > 0.7. Finally, we administered the PPQr in a larger, independent sample of researchers to check the reliability of the revised version.
resultsThree components were identified as 'stress', 'attitude', and 'resources'. We selected 3 × 6 = 18 items with high loadings in the three-component solution. Based on the convenience sample, Cronbach's alphas were 0.83 for stress, 0.80 for attitude, and 0.76 for resources. We checked the validity of the PPQr by inspecting the correlations with the MBI and the WDQ. Stress correlated 0.62 with MBI's emotional exhaustion. Resources correlated 0.50 with relevant WDQ subscales. To assess the internal structure of the PPQr in the independent reliability sample, we conducted the principal component analysis. The three-component solution explains 50% of the variance. Cronbach's alphas were 0.80, 0.78, and 0.75 for stress, attitude, and resources, respectively.
conclusionWe conclude that the PPQr is a valid and reliable instrument to measure publication pressure in academic researchers from all disciplinary fields. The PPQr strongly relates to burnout and could also be beneficial for policy makers and research institutions to assess the degree of publication pressure in their institute.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.