Exploring factors associated with scholarly writing among US pharmacy practice faculty.

OBJECTIVES

This study explored intrinsic facilitators (i.e., grit, self-efficacy, and writing motivation) and barriers associated with scholarly output as measured by self-reported publications among US pharmacy practice faculty.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study design was used to gather information regarding scholarly writing output and intrinsic facilitators and barriers among US pharmacy practice faculty using an online self-reported survey. The survey link was distributed via email between October and November 2017. The Grit-S, New Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale (NGSE), and Scholarly Writing Motivation Scale (SWMS) were used to measure grit, self-efficacy, and writing motivation, respectively. Perceived barriers, self-reported quantity of publications, and demographics were also collected. A structural equation modeling (SEM) approach was used to determine effects of perceived barriers and each intrinsic factor on self-reported total publications.

RESULTS

N = 208 participants were included in the analyses. The average number of self-reported annual publications was 1.88. Participants who reported having higher than average numbers of annual publications (n = 85, 40.9%) more frequently held a PhD degree and were more frequently in the tenure track, compared to those with annual publications less than the average (n = 123, 59.1%). The majority of both groups reported being employed in public institutions. Lack of time for scholarly writing was the highest perceived barrier and lack of knowledge about technical writing/English mastery was the lowest. All three SEM models consistently showed that perceived barriers were negatively associated with numbers of self-reported publications. However, only scholarly writing motivation according to SWMS was positively associated with the numbers of self-reported publications.

CONCLUSIONS

Writing motivation and barriers to scholarly writing are shown to have a significant impact on scholarly output. These factors can be identified and should be appropriately addressed by colleges/schools of pharmacy to enhance scholarly activities among pharmacy practice faculty.