skip to main content
Center for Workforce Studies

Contact CWS

2018-19: Psychology Faculty Salaries

Peggy Christidis, Jessica Conroy, Luona Lin and Karen Stamm

APA Center for Workforce Studies

Date created: July 2019

Download as PDF opens in new window
expand all

Each year, the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources (CUPA-HR) conducts compensation surveys for faculty in higher education. Salary data are broken down by several variables, including academic discipline, academic rank, tenure status, institution type, presence of collective bargaining units and Carnegie Classification of the institution. This report focuses on salaries collected by CUPA-HR for psychology faculty employed full-time in four-year colleges and universities during the 2018-19 academic year.

  • When adjusted for inflation, median salaries between 2017-18 and 2018-19 did not increase for most faculty. In fact, salaries either remained stagnant, or decreased (between 1% and 6%). Depending on the academic rank, salaries often did not keep pace with inflation, and psychology faculty from all academic ranks and at all types of Carnegie classifications saw fewer positive changes in their salaries between 2018 and 2019 than they did between 2017 and 2018.
  • Tenured/tenure-track psychology faculty employed at private independent institutions earned the highest salaries – more than faculty at private religious and public institutions – across all academic ranks. Psychology faculty employed at private religious institutions had the lowest median salaries.
  • Tenured/tenure-track psychology faculty working in New England (i.e., Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont) earned the highest median salaries, followed closely by the Pacific division of the United States (i.e., Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington). The lowest median salaries were reported for faculty in the West South Central (i.e., Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas) and West North Central (i.e., Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota) geographic divisions.
  • For psychology tenured/tenure-track positions, the majority of faculty in the academic ranks of new assistant professor, assistant professor, and associate professor were female. However, there were more male faculty (54%) than female faculty (46%) in the position of professor. Male and female tenured/tenure-track psychology faculty earned nearly equivalent median salaries across all academic ranks, with the exception of the rank of professor, where female professors earned 95% of the median salary of male professors (approximately $5,000 less).
  • Racial/ethnic minority psychology faculty in tenured/tenure-track positions earned salaries that were similar (or surpassed) the salaries of White psychology faculty. However, fewer racial/ethnic minorities held these faculty positions, particularly in higher academic ranks, such as associate professor (18%) and professor (12%).
  • Psychology faculty working at public institutions with collective bargaining units earned more than psychology faculty who worked at public institutions without collective bargaining units. Collapsed across all academic ranks, the median salary of unionized faculty who were tenured/tenure-track was 14% greater than that of their non-unionized counterparts. Non-tenured psychology faculty with collective bargaining had a median salary that was 20% more than that of non-tenured faculty without collective bargaining.
  • Collapsed across academic rank and institution type (i.e., public, private independent and private religious), non-tenure-track teaching faculty earned approximately 78% in median salary earned by tenured/tenure-track faculty.
  • In general, psychology faculty earned less than faculty working in other social science disciplines, as well as faculty in other STEM or STEM-related disciplines.

American Psychological Association (2018). Psychology faculty salaries for the 2017-2018 academic year: Results from the 2017 CUPA-HR survey for four-year colleges and universities.  Washington, DC: Author.

Bichsel, J., Li, J., McChesney, J & Pritchard, A. (2019). Faculty in Higher Education Annual Report: Key Findings, Trends, and Comprehensive Tables for Tenure Track, Non-Tenure Track Teaching, Non-Tenure Track Research Faculty; Academic Department Heads; and Adjunct Faculty for the 2018-19 Academic Year. Research report. Knoxville, TN: CUPA-HR. Available from https://www.cupahr.org/surveys/resultsopens in new window.

Carnegie Commission on Higher Education (2010). The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/lookup_listings/standard.phpopens in new window.

College and University Professional Association for Human Resources [CUPA-HR] (2016). Faculty in Higher Education Salary Survey for the 2015-16 Academic Year: By Discipline, Rank and Tenure Status in Four-Year Colleges and Universities. Knoxville, TN: Author.

Landivar, L. C. (2013). The Relationship between Science and Engineering Education and Employment in STEM Occupations. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2013/acs/acs-23.html.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2017). CPI Detailed Report: Data for December 2018.  Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/cpi_01112019.htmopens in new window.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2016). CPI Inflation Calculator. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htmopens in new window.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System [IPEDS] (2013). IPEDS glossary.  

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS).  Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP). Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/cipcode/browse.aspx?y=55opens in new window.

Recommended citation: American Psychological Association (2019). Psychology faculty salaries for the 2018-2019 academic year: Results from the 2019 CUPA-HR survey for four-year colleges and universities. Washington, DC: Author.

This report describes research and analysis conducted by staff members of the American Psychological Association’s Center for Workforce Studies. It does not constitute official policy of the American Psychological Association.

The authors thank Jackie Bichsel and Jasper McChesney of CUPA-HR for providing additional special analyses on psychology faculty presented in this report, and Howard Kurtzman for valuable input on previous drafts of this report.

Copyright © 2019 by the American Psychological Association. This material may be reproduced in whole or in part without fees or permission, provided that acknowledgement is given to the American Psychological Association. This material may not be reprinted or translated without prior permission in writing from the publisher. For permission, contact APA, Rights and Permissions, 750 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242.

The American Psychological Association’s Center for Workforce Studies is responsible for the collection, analysis and dissemination of information relevant to the psychology workforce and education system. Through the use of surveys, federal statistics and data mining, the Center gathers information about the profession of psychology, including its scientific and educational communities, practitioners, and psychologists working in the public interest.

For questions regarding this report, please contact the APA Center for Workforce Studies by email or (800) 374-2721 (extension 5980).