Is Mainstream Psychological Research “Womanless” and “Raceless”? An Updated Analysis

Is Mainstream Psychological Research “Womanless” and “Raceless”? An Updated Analysis In the late 20th century, mainstream psychological research was accused of being “womanless” and “raceless” by excluding women and members of racial-ethnic minority groups and by interpreting their experiences as deviant from White male norms. The present article provides an updated analysis of the state of psychological research by examining research published in 2007 in eight prominent journals across four subdisciplines (N = 255). Two types of data were examined: (1) gender and racial-ethnic representation at the levels of editor, senior author, and participant, and (2) the presence of biased assumptions in reporting tendencies. Representation was interpreted in relation to relevant baselines drawn from U.S. data. Women and members of racial-ethnic minority groups do not appear to be underrepresented as editors in mainstream psychology. However, women continue to be underrepresented as senior authors, and members of racial-ethnic minority groups continue to be underrepresented as research participants. Furthermore, studies using predominately male or White samples (vs. female or racial-ethnic minority samples) were less likely to indicate participant gender or race-ethnicity in the title and marginally less likely to provide a rationale for including participants of only one social group, consistent with the notion that reporting tendencies within mainstream psychological research continue to reflect assumptions that men and Whites are more typical members of the category “human” than are women and racial-ethnic minorities. These findings indicate that mainstream psychology has not yet reached social equity and that efforts to increase diversity and decrease subtle biases should continue to be supported and funded. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Sex Roles Springer Journals

Is Mainstream Psychological Research “Womanless” and “Raceless”? An Updated Analysis

Sex Roles , Volume 67 (4) – Mar 20, 2012
Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/is-mainstream-psychological-research-womanless-and-raceless-an-updated-0fbJgQ0PMH
Publisher
Springer US
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 by Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
Subject
Psychology; Medicine/Public Health, general; Sociology, general; Gender Studies
ISSN
0360-0025
eISSN
1573-2762
D.O.I.
10.1007/s11199-012-0141-7
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In the late 20th century, mainstream psychological research was accused of being “womanless” and “raceless” by excluding women and members of racial-ethnic minority groups and by interpreting their experiences as deviant from White male norms. The present article provides an updated analysis of the state of psychological research by examining research published in 2007 in eight prominent journals across four subdisciplines (N = 255). Two types of data were examined: (1) gender and racial-ethnic representation at the levels of editor, senior author, and participant, and (2) the presence of biased assumptions in reporting tendencies. Representation was interpreted in relation to relevant baselines drawn from U.S. data. Women and members of racial-ethnic minority groups do not appear to be underrepresented as editors in mainstream psychology. However, women continue to be underrepresented as senior authors, and members of racial-ethnic minority groups continue to be underrepresented as research participants. Furthermore, studies using predominately male or White samples (vs. female or racial-ethnic minority samples) were less likely to indicate participant gender or race-ethnicity in the title and marginally less likely to provide a rationale for including participants of only one social group, consistent with the notion that reporting tendencies within mainstream psychological research continue to reflect assumptions that men and Whites are more typical members of the category “human” than are women and racial-ethnic minorities. These findings indicate that mainstream psychology has not yet reached social equity and that efforts to increase diversity and decrease subtle biases should continue to be supported and funded.

Journal

Sex RolesSpringer Journals

Published: Mar 20, 2012

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off