Research and Statistical Techniques Used in the Journal of Counseling & Development: 1990–2001

The Journal of Counseling & Development (JCD) is the principal journal of the American Counseling Association (ACA) and is considered by many to be the premier counseling journal in the world. JCD is the only association-wide journal for ACA and is read by more than 55,000 counselors (ACA, 2002) who rely on it as a scholarly resource for improving their work with clients (Borders, 1996). JCD publishes articles focused on counseling theory, practice, research, opinion, and professional association-related matters. The Research section of JCD is devoted primarily to publishing empirical investigations related to counseling theory and methods, counselor training and education, and the efficacy of specific counseling interventions. The publication of research in peer-reviewed journals is one of the major vehicles for serving and promoting the investigation and dissemination of counseling theory and practice (Lindsey, 1978). However, an overriding issue among practitioners is the degree to which results of empirical research are presented in an understandable and usable format (Sabatino, 1981). This concern suggests that the generalization of research outcomes to practice is dependent on the reader's ability to understand the research methods and analyses used in studies published in journals like JCD. Familiarity with common research practices found in the studies published by JCD is essential if counselors and other mental health professionals are to make informed decisions regarding the application of research outcomes to their own individual practice. The historical analysis of research articles like those published in JCD can provide empirical insights into the most widely used research methods and statistical analyses that readers would be expected to understand in order to critically evaluate outcomes with respect to their own practice. According to Thompson and Snyder (1998), Because both the counseling field and the methodological fields do evolve over time, and change the consensus about what constitutes accepted practice, it is important to self-evaluate contemporary practice on a regular basis to ensure that ongoing practice reflects current thinking. (p. 436) Thompson and Snyder's observation suggests that as research methods evolve, readers' knowledge and understanding of commonly used methodologies must also advance if they are to stay current in the counseling field. Awareness of current research practices is vitally important for counselor training programs that are charged with ensuring that graduates are equipped with the necessary skills to conduct their own investigations as well as to fully understand the investigations of others. JCD has been the subject of numerous content analyses regarding general research topics and methodologies. For example, Sexton (1996) investigated trends in counseling outcome research focus and methods by reviewing research published in mental health journals from 1988 to 1994. Results from this analysis indicated that most research conducted during that time period used descriptive field research to explore the efficacy of individual counseling interventions. Whiston and Sexton (1998) found similar results when summarizing school counseling outcome research published between 1988 and 1995. Their study found that most published research during that time frame focused on counseling interventions and incorporated quantitative methods using statistical techniques to answer the primary research questions investigated by the authors. Thompson and Snyder (1998) studied the use and interpretation of statistical significance testing for quantitative research articles published by JCD in 1996. Their research specifically focused on the frequency with which authors who used tests of statistical significance also reported and interpreted effect sizes. Their analysis found at least one effect size such as Cohen's d, [r. …