The rating method of measuring scientific eminence is employed to evaluate the relative importanoe of living, contemporary contributors to psychology according to an Australian group of raters, namely the students'and facultyof the University of Queensland Psychology Department. An eminence index' and a 'recognition index* are used to assess the judged eminence end recognition of 174 contributors, comprising 84 Americans, 36 Australians, 23 British, 13 Canadians, 12 New Zealanders, 4 Russians and 2 Frenchmen, The 'eminence indebc', calculated using 423 subjects', provides rating lists which indicate that the top ranking contributors are generally Americans. Australian psychologists, including Fellows of the Academy of the Social Sciences and those previously found to be the most productive publishers in the country, are on the whole poorly ranked. This index also reveals a considerable difference in opinion and / or knowledge of prominent contributors by the faculty as compared with students. The 'recognition index', consisting of 25 scores pertaining to subjects' overall recognition of the listed contributors and also their knowledge of the various nationalities, ASSA members and departmental facility 5 is derived using a reduced sample of 310 subjects. Results on this measure show that American contributors are also better recognized than Australian psychologists, including ASSA members. Raters exhibit very limited awareness of psychologists in other Australian universities. However the worst recognised groups are the New Zealanders and Russians. Seven SPSS Stepwise Discriminant analyses explore and establish a relationship between the recognition of prominent contributors and various rater variables, namely: (l) current year in psychology, (2) age, (3) sex, (4) faculty, (5 ) degree, (6) intended degree in psychology, and (7 ) main interest area in the discipline. Although all seven provide significant discriminations, the most powerful factor is current year in psychology. This comparison confirms the faculty group's superior knowledge of prominent contributors and shows that a rating study can reveal information about the raters as well as the ratees.