Membership

APS Membership Survey Analysis

Note: The percentages in the following tables are based on the total number of respondents in that particular age category. (i.e., 72% of males in the 66-85 age category indicated they are professors).

Section Affiliation
The largest section affiliation of the respondents is the Cardiovascular section (23.5%), while the Cell & Molecular Physiology section ranks second with 12.1% of the respondents. The next three largest sections are the Endocrinology & Metabolism Section, Respiration Section, and the Environmental & Exercise Section.
 

Figure 1: Academic Appointment by Gender (all respondents).

Services and Products
The AJP journals were rated highly in terms of their value to the APS members. AJP - Heart and Circulatory Physiology was ranked higher than the other AJP journals, which is expected as the Cardiovascular Section is the largest section in APS. Physiological Genomics was ranked high by 76% of the respondents, with the Journal of Applied Physiology being the next highest ranked publication in order of importance. Approximately 65% of the members consider Physiology (formerly NIPS) to be an important publication of the Society. Most respondents (29%) only ranked the Sections’ newsletters of average importance.

The Experimental Biology meetings were ranked by 68% of the respondents as being an important benefit to them, while the Society’s conferences/intersociety meetings only received an average rating in importance as a Society service or benefit. However, 54% of members under age 35, ranked the conferences high in importance.
 

Figure 2: Professor by Age and Gender.

APS Online Resources/Services
The free online journal subscription service was ranked highest by respondents in terms of its value to the members, with the online FASEB directory and the APS Members-only website being the next two highest ranked services in order of importance to the members. More than 30% of the respondents had no opinion on the Section listservs, and only 8% believed it to be an important service. At least one third of the respondents indicated that the mentoring website and program was not of high importance, and 29% had no opinion on the program. Surprisingly, only 35% of younger members ranked this service high in importance, and 33% had no opinion of the service.

Other Services
The APS website and discounted meeting registration were the two highest ranked benefits/services based on their value to the members. The least valued service is the Society’s Book Program.

Dues and Fees
More than half of the respondents indicated that they pay for their APS membership dues (60%), but less than 20% pay for their meeting registration fees, and only 10% personally pay their author fees.
The following suggestions were made regarding APS services and products:

• “The EB meeting does not come across as a meeting where all topics published in the APS journals are addressed.”
• “Discount meeting registration for members is still expensive for developing countries.”
• “At the EB meetings, APS and ASNS have many symposia topics that overlap and are programmed at EB at competing/conflicting times.”
• “Many services are unknown or are not helpful to non-US investigators.”
• “Student members do not benefit immensely from the APS Awards Program as compared to the regular members.
• “The Awards Program should be opened to all members regardless of country and there should be a cap on travel awards.”
• “APS needs more postdoctoral programs for non-minorities.”

Figure 3: Associate Professors by Age and Gender

Meetings and Conferences
An average, 32% of the respondents attended an EB meeting within the past five years. The three most cited reasons for attending were the symposia program, the poster sessions, and the featured topic sessions. The younger respondents rated those three reasons highly as well as the networking opportunities presented at the EB meetings. Only 32% of the younger respondents rated FASEB job placement fair/placement service high in importance.

The majority of respondents who attended an EB meeting indicated that the All-APS email messages, The Physiologist, and the APS website or other websites were their primary sources of obtaining information for APS meetings.

The two most cited reasons for not attending the EB meetings were limited travel budget and personal commitments; and for the younger members it was limited travel budget and meeting content. This was also true for the younger respondents. Less than 1% of the respondents cited post 9/11 safety concerns as a reason for not attending the meetings. These same two reasons were most cited by respondents for not attending any of the APS conferences held over the past three years.

Figure 4: Assistant Professor by Age and Gender

APS Journals
The majority of respondents (93%) indicated that they do access the APS journals online. The percentage was slightly higher for younger members. Although 54% of respondents rated the overall quality of the online journal system high, 75% indicated that APS should continue publishing printed versions of the journals. Respondents also rated high the quality of the peer review system and the quality of copy-editing services.

More than 60% of the respondents indicated that they have submitted at least one manuscript to an APS journal within the past three years, while more than 50% of the respondents have published at least one manuscript in an APS journal within the past three years. In the past three years, nearly 50% of the respondents have served as a reviewer, 12% have served on an editorial board, but only 3% have served as an editor/associate editor for an APS journal.
When comparing the APS journals against competing journals, 22.6% indicated that the APS journals are better than the competitors’, and 35.1% said that the APS journals are equal to those of the competitors’.

Figure 5: Instructor by Age and Gender

Advances in Physiological Education
Just over half of the respondents (56%) indicated that they read/use the print version of Advances in Physiological Education, however, about 1/3 indicated that they did not read or use the publication at all. More than half of those that read Advances indicated that they would be happy with using the online version only, allowing APS to stop publishing a print version.

Education and Careers Program
Overall, the education activities were rated of equal importance, with only developing new teaching resources for undergraduate and graduate physiology being ranked slightly higher than the other programs. Members of the Teaching Section ranked the activity of providing an online clearinghouse and archive of teaching resources as the most important. All of the respondents, including the Teaching Section members, ranked the program “developing outreach programs for K-12 teachers and students and developing new physiology teaching resources for K-12 science education” as the least important program.

Respondents made the following suggestions regarding the APS education programs:

• “Older published materials could be re-purposed for other audiences (Neural networks/Physiology of fitness background information for non-majors college physiology lab background information, etc.).”
• “Communicate and coordinate with Chapters on Refresher courses so the Chapters can use material presented at the national meetings.
• “Correlation of lessons to NCATE and NSES standards and assuring that these are the essential and primary criteria for lesson development (rather than, for example, what might be ‘interesting’ to students).”
• “Hold workshops during the summer so members unable to attend the EB meetings can have the opportunity to attend the workshops.”

Respondents ranked high all of the career-related programs. The two programs receiving the highest rating from both the overall group of respondents and the younger group were “providing an online meeting and discussion forums for physiology trainees,” and “Publicizing job opportunities in the physiological sciences.” The program that received the lowest ranking by both groups was “developing examples of career paths (personal vignettes) as models.”

Respondents made the following suggestions regarding the APS career-related programs:

• Guidance for mid-career.
• Alternate career path mentors.
• Encourage the private sector to do more recruiting at EB meetings.
• Programs for retired members.

Figure 6: Department Chairs by Age and Gender

Public Affairs
Approximately half of the respondents indicated that federal funding levels and Peer Review/Study Section Procedures are very important public affairs issues. Two other public affairs issues-Trend from individual grants to teams, centers, etc., and agency funding priorities-were issues of high importance. However, about 16% of the respondents had no opinion on the importance of any of these issues.

The overall issue of animal use in research is important to the respondents, with 53% of the respondents listing government regulations as one of the major concerns with regards to the use of animals. The other concerns pertaining to animal use in research-IACUC Review Issues, Policies at institutions, and activist intimidation of researchers-were ranked about equal in terms of importance. It is surprising to note that approximately 16% of the overall respondents, and almost 19% of the younger members, did not have an opinion on any of the animal research issues.
NIH has been the primary source of funding for many APS members over the past five years. Of those respondents whose main source of funding was from one of the NIH institutions, 65% received their majority of funding from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI), and 63.5% received their main source of funding from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) were identified as the next two most significant sources of funding.

The National Science Foundation has also been a significant source of funding for APS members over the past five years. From those voluntary health agencies that fund research, APS members have received the largest percentage of funding from the American Heart Association (AHA).

Figure 7: Postdocs age 20-35

Communications
Slightly more than half of the respondents (56.5%) rated accurate reporting of physiological research in the public media as the most important issue, and public understanding as the next most important issue (44%).

How can APS be more responsive to your professional needs?

Although many respondents indicated that APS is doing a good job in meeting their professional needs, others made offered recommendations on what APS could do better.

Recommendations:

• More interaction with other international societies.
• Improve the impact factors of the APS journals.
• More fully integrate international members into the Society.
• Bridge industry with research and clinical practice.
• Expand interest and inclusion of veterinary physiologists.
• Provide more support to young investigators.
• Lobbying for increased funding for NIH.
• Encourage medical students and residents to pursue careers as physician scientists that encompass physiology.
• Do a better job in promoting physiology to undergraduate students, as well at the lay public.
• Publicizing grant opportunities.
• Smaller, more focused meetings like the APS conferences.

Figure 8: Section Affiliation (total respondents)

What would you say is the single most important reason for belonging to APS?

The two most cited reasons for joining APS (or renewing membership) are the APS publications and the EB meetings. Other reasons included:

• Fellowship of physiological community
• Professional loyalty; supporting the profession
• Networking
• Teaching resources
• Prestige of belonging to a professional society
• Free color
• Reduced page charges
• Job opportunities
• Dissemination of information including developments in the profession, physiology education, and political climate
• Lobbying efforts in Congress.
• Programs in the Education Department

Figure 9: Major Sources of NIH Funding.

In 2005, the APS leadership will develop a five-year Strategic Plan. What do you think are the important directions, initiatives, and/or programs to include in that plan?
Survey respondents offered the following recommendations for what they believe APS should focus on during the next five years:
 

Recommendations:

• Integration with other professional societies, including international societies.
• Keep physiology at the forefront of science and emphasize its importance in medicine.
• Alternate careers for physiologists.
• Increased funding for NIH, NSF, and VA (government funding and alternate sources of funding).
• Maintaining high quality of journals.
• Promoting physiology.
• Expanding work in undergraduate education to attract more students to physiology.
• Continued education of the lay public about the importance of physiology and the need for animal research.
• Increase interest and awareness of physiology at the K-12 levels.
• Increasing the impact factors of the journals.
• Promotion of integrative and translational physiology.
• Improve the EB meetings.

New Regular Members
(*transferred from Student Membership)

New Student Members

New Affiliate Members

Recently Deceased Members

[Index] [Dale Benos, 79th President of APS] [Introducing Dale Benos] [APS News] [Physiology Funding] [Public Affairs] [People & Places] [Book Review] [Books Received] [Senior Physiologists’ News] [The Wine Wizard] [Positions Available] [Scientific Meetings and Congresses] [APS Membership Application]