Upending racism in psychological science: Strategies to change how science is conducted, reported, reviewed, and disseminated.

Abstract

As efforts to end systemic racism gain momentum across various contexts, it is critical to consider antiracist steps needed to improve psychological science. Current scientific practices may serve to maintain white supremacy with significant and impactful consequences. Extant research practices reinforce norms of homogeneity within BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color) populations, segregate theories, and methods derived from BIPOC groups, apply disparate standards to the evaluation of research on white versus BIPOC populations, and discourage BIPOC scholars from pursuing research careers. Perhaps consequently, disparities persist on a range of psychologically relevant outcomes (e.g., mental and physical health). This article presents examples of how epistemic oppression exists within psychological science, including in how science is conducted, reported, reviewed, and disseminated. This article offers a needed contribution by providing specific concrete recommendations for different stakeholders, including those involved in the production, reporting, and gatekeeping of science as well as consumers of science. Additionally, a discussion of accountability steps are offered to ensure that psychological science moves beyond talk and toward action, with possible strategies to measure outcomes, stimulate progress, promote dialogue and action, challenge inequity, and upend the influence of white supremacy in psychological science.

The Need for Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy in the Black Community and the Burdens of Its Provision

“…These individuals may be native to or trace their origins to countries within the African Diaspora and where the native people typically share darker skin shades; however, settler-colonialism has resulted in Black people now having a full spectrum of skin shades. Importantly, Black is a social category, and as such, a person racialized as Black in the US or Canada may not be considered Black in other nations or societies ( 13 ).…”

MMPI-3 scale predictors of reactions to ostracism in a sample of racially diverse college students.

“…Research on the previous version of the instrument, the MMPI-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF; Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2011), focused on differential predictive validity and found minimal evidence of test bias in specific samples (e.g., bariatric surgery candidates, Marek et al, 2015; forensic psychiatric inpatients, Whitman et al, 2019), and research on the MMPI-2 and prior test iterations likewise found minimal evidence for test bias across racialized groups (e.g., Arbisi et al, 2002; Castro et al, 2008; McNulty et al, 1997). Scholars have noted the extreme paucity of psychological science research with representation of POC populations (Buchanan et al, 2021; Roberts et al, 2020), and calls to consider racialized context extend to the domain of psychological assessment (e.g., Byrd et al, 2021). Given this and the aforementioned likely racialized context and experience of ostracism, the present study also extended its focus to subsamples characterized by self-reported race.…”

Relationship functioning of sexual minority people of color.

“…The pervasive lack of SMPOC representation in couples' research has resulted in a dominant White narrative that is applied to all SM couples, regardless of their racial or ethnic identity. Many researchers and clinicians, including Buchanan et al (2020) and Garcia et al (2018) have highlighted this lack of representation in the research, along with difficulties about how to define, conceptualize, and account for racial, ethnic, and cultural roles, structures, and beliefs. The lack of clear definitions of race and ethnicity, and the conflation of race (i.e., a group of people who are similar physically or by hereditary traits such as skin color; Cokley, 2007) and ethnicity (i.e., a group of people with shared ancestry, national origin, and/or cultural characteristics such as language, traditions, and norms; Cokley, 2007) further complicates the analysis of SMPOC in relationships.…”

“…Other approaches involve asking participants one question about their racial identity and another regarding whether they identify as being of Hispanic or Latino/a/x origin. Best practices in measurement, design, and the operationalization of race and/or ethnicity in survey questions, along with which labels or terms to use and the number of options available, are greatly debated (e.g., Buchanan et al, 2020;Garcia et al, 2018;Helms et al, 2005;Phinney, 1996).…”

“…Without diverse participant samples, we are unable to account for the racial and ethnic identities, values, and historical contexts of SMPOC that shape not only the lives of individuals, but also the functioning of couples. This lack of accounting for these contexts results from and perpetuates the systematic bias and predominately White narrative of SM couples in psychological research (e. g., Buchanan et al, 2020). Researchers have suggested a number of ways to correct these prevalent biases and the misrepresentation of racial, ethnic, or cultural groups (e.g., Buchanan et al, 2020;Garcia et al, 2018;Helms et al, 2005;Phinney, 1996).…”