Intersectionality in Quantitative Psychological Research

Abstract

Intersectionality has become something of a buzzword in psychology and is well-known in feminist writings throughout the social sciences. Across diverse definitions of intersectionality, we find three common assumptions: (1) There is a recognition that all people are characterized simultaneously by multiple social categories and that these categories are interconnected or intertwined. (2) Embedded within each of these categories is a dimension of inequality or power. (3) These categories are properties of the individual as well as characteristics of the social context inhabited by those individuals; as such, categories and their significance may be fluid and dynamic. Understanding intersectionality as an approach and critical theory, rather than as a falsifiable theory, we consider its potential within research using quantitative methods. We discuss positivism, social constructionism, and standpoint epistemology in order to examine the implications of these epistemologies for research methods and to explore how compatible an intersectional approach may be with each. With an eye toward expanding the incorporation of intersectional approaches in the psychology of women, we discuss both the challenges and the potential of combining quantitative methods and intersectionality. We contend that quantitative methods can be used within an intersectional approach and that doing so will expand and develop the study of intersectionality, insofar as more research tools will be available to intersectionality researchers. We also contend that quantitative researchers should incorporate an intersectional approach into their work and that doing so will enrich and deepen our understanding of psychological constructs and processes.

Research Microcultures as Socialization Contexts for Underrepresented Science Students

“…It is unclear whether our focus on labmates’ beliefs among advanced undergraduates RAs accounts for why we only find effects of ethnicity, or whether other factors such as the particular diversity of our sample or institutional contexts, or relatively low statistical power for intersectional analyses explain these differences across studies. Future research is needed on the social processes influencing motivational experiences of students from all types of intersecting social identities (Else-Quest & Hyde, 2016). …”

Hegemonic Heteronormativity: Toward a New Era of Queer Family Theory

“…We maintain several characteristics of our proposed model's contextual spheres. First, individuals do not exist in only one (or several) of the spheres at a particular point in time: Such an interconnected reality reflects that of the social locations largely understood within the intersectionality literature (e.g., Cho et al, ; Else‐Quest & Hyde, ; Few‐Demo, ). When individuals are placed correspondingly within each of the three binaries of hegemonic heteronormativity, they simultaneously exist at a point in space within each of the five proposed contextual spheres.…”

An intersectional approach for understanding the vulnerabilities of English-speaking heterosexual Caribbean youth to HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted infections: Prevention and intervention strategies

“…It should be underscored that a disproportionate number of the early research studies on the intersectional approach used qualitative methods. Recently, quantitative methods are being increasingly used in intersectional research (Else-Quest and Hyde, 2016). …”

“…As shown, there is an examination of the general drivers/risk factors of HIV/AIDS and STIs for 15- to 24-year-old youth, including poverty and income inequality, gender power imbalances, socio-cultural norms, low educational status, stigmatized sexual behaviors, and governmental policies, as well as the micro-level drivers, including family dynamics, sex abuse, risky sexual behaviors, and neurobiological and hormonal processes. This framework also simultaneously examines both the interplay between and among the relevant macro-level and micro-level factors and assess the combined effects of these variables (Else-Quest and Hyde, 2016). Also shown are the prevention/intervention variables which serve as buffers against the effects of structural and micro-level risk factors thereby contributing to improved health outcomes for at-risk Caribbean youth.…”

“…Intersectionality theorizing lends itself to the within-group design, for instance, studying only ESC male adolescents while also using a between-group design such as 2 (gender) × 2 (lower and middle-class statuses) × 2 (place of residences—urban or rural). This quantitative design allows for the examination of the “effects at specific intersectional locations” (Else-Quest and Hyde, 2016: 324).…”