Disciplinary societies seldom make news outside of academe, and when they do, it’s rarely for a happy reason.
Such is the case with the American Psychological Association, a century-old body that finds itself in the thick of controversy after the release of a report that documents how the organization, and purportedly its former head of ethics in particular, aided and abetted torture committed by the U.S. military during the George W. Bush administration.
What is the APA, and how does it compare with other scholarly groups? Here are some things to remember:
The APA is very big.
In 2013 the APA employed 722 people, held more than $250 million in total assets, and pulled in annual revenue of $127 million, according to its most recent Form 990, a financial disclosure that tax-exempt groups file with the Internal Revenue Service. Few scholarly groups come close to that scale of operations. Groups representing anthropologists and sociologists, for example, have about one-tenth of the membership and a fraction of the income of the APA. Another group, the Association for Psychological Science, was founded in 1988 and promotes “scientifically oriented psychology.” It earned $6.8 million in 2013.
The APA is in robust financial health.
An analysis of disciplinary associations by The Chronicle in 2012 divided them into two camps: those that are prospering and those facing uncertain futures. The APA, with a large and diversified revenue stream, was prospering. It owns two buildings and, like many well-off groups, runs a lucrative business with its searchable database of research. The APA’s PsycINFO database enables scholars to search for abstracts dating to 1880 by keywords and index terms. It accounted for more than $50 million in income in 2010.
The healthy revenues have translated into generous pay for many on its staff. Sixteen people earned at least $230,000 in total and deferred compensation in 2013, according to the 990. Norman B. Anderson, chief executive officer and executive vice president, led the way, with $769,826. Steven Behnke, associate director of ethics, who was harshly criticized in the recent report and has since been dismissed, took in $249,313.
The APA tries to cut a big public profile.
In recent years the APA has seen itself as “a uniting force for the discipline,” a spokesman told The Chronicle in 2012, by advocating for the field and promoting innovation in the development and training of psychologists. It also spent nearly $600,000 on lobbying policy makers and influencing public opinion. Annual meetings, which often serve as showcases for disciplinary groups, provided just 2 percent of the psychological association’s annual revenue in 2013. Its meetings are important, however, as “a major service and engagement vehicle for our members,” the spokesman said. Many attendees see it as an opportunity for networking.
Its membership is diverse and aging.
Academic psychologists account for a small number of members; about one in five works for a college, according to an analysis of 2010 data that was shared with The Chronicle. A majority of members work as health-service providers, many of them in private practice. The remainder of them work in government, business, and nonprofit groups. Membership is also aging and declining in number. In 2010 the association’s website listed 154,842 members. The number now stands at 122,500, a drop of over 20 percent. Increases in early-career members have not offset the pace of those who are leaving the APA, often due to retirement. In 2012 the average age of the association’s members was 55.
Dan Berrett writes about teaching, learning, the curriculum, and educational quality. Follow him on Twitter @danberrett, or write to him at dan.berrett@chronicle.com.
