Abstract
Designations of major figures (max. = 3) were obtained in each of 1767 history-of-psychology publications (mostly journal articles) from 1975 to 1986. The distribution of these major-figure designations of psychologists was compared with the distribution of a measure of eminence that was developed by Zusne in 1985 and is based on the amount of textbook-page-space given to an individual. The two measures correlate significantly but are not equivalent. Those judged to be major figures in contemporary history-of-psychology journals overlap less than 20% with those designated eminent by virtue of large page-space coverage in history-of-psychology textbooks. Advantages and disadvantages of major-figure designations as an index of the importance or eminence of psychologists are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.