Restricted Research - Award List, Note/Discussion Page
Fiscal Year: 2023
243 University of North Texas (142131)
Principal Investigator: Jones,Martinque Karee
Total Amount of Contract, Award, or Gift (Annual before 2011): $ 12,000
Exceeds $250,000 (Is it flagged?): No
Start and End Dates: 9/29/22 - 9/28/23
Restricted Research: YES
Academic Discipline: Psychology
Department, Center, School, or Institute: College of Lib Arts & Soc Sci
Title of Contract, Award, or Gift: Understanding Disparities in Psychological Research Through A Lens of Epistemic Exclusion
Name of Granting or Contracting Agency/Entity:
Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues (SPSSI)
CFDA:
Program Title: none
Note:
Diversity is critical to innovation and the development of scientific advancements necessary for moving toward a socially just and equitable world (Hofstra et al., 2020). And for that reason, institutions have sought to diversify by increasing their representation of faculty from marginalized groups (e.g., women and people of color). Yet, within the field of psychology these diversification efforts have had minimal impact in terms of who is represented in the field (84% White/European American; American Psychological Association, 2022) and the scope of the scholarship produced (e.g., research on race and intersectionality; Roberts et al., 2020; Settles et al., 2020). A growing number of studies point to how individual biases against members of marginalized groups contribute to these disparities (e.g., hiring bias; Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2017), but far fewer have considered how disparities are systemically-rooted (for exceptions, see Buchanan et al., 2021; Settles et al., 2019, 2021). We suggest that epistemic exclusion, scholarly devaluation based on disciplinary and identity-based biases within systems of evaluation, is useful in understanding how disparities in scholar representation and scholarly focus are connected to systems of inequality. Moreover, we see journal review and publication processes as a site where epistemic exclusion occurs and a critical point of intervention for reducing disparities. Journal review and publication processes represent a system of evaluation. Editors and reviewers serve as key evaluators, using seemingly objective evaluation standards to determine whether research may be considered rigorous and significant to the field. However, the theory of epistemic exclusion puts forth that these seemingly neutral evaluation processes are not neutral, but rather reflect disciplinary and identity-based biases that disproportionately and negatively impact scholars from marginalized groups1 (Settles et al., 2021). For instance, psychology has historically devalued research on race and ethnicity as lacking generalizability; when conducted by racially marginalized scholars, such work faces additional devaluation, greater scrutiny, and is perceived as lacking objectivity (e.g., me-search). However, because these biases are believed to be connected to seemingly value-free assessments of scientific quality, disparities in scholarly representation and scholarly focus persist, even in spaces where the stated values are aligned with diversity, equity, and justice. To address this possibility within the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, the proposed study will survey manuscripts submitted to The Journal of Social Issues, Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, and Social Issues and Policy Review between the years of 2011 to 2021. We will draw upon the theory of epistemic exclusion to examine the extent to which disciplinary and identity-based biases lead to disparities in the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts based on the demographics (race/ethnicity and gender) of the evaluators (e.g., editor-in-chief) and first authors, and paper topic, namely whether the research focuses on race/racism, gender/sexism, or intersectionality. Aligned with this objective, we have three specific aims regarding target manuscripts, that is manuscripts submitted for publication that are (a) first authored by a marginalized scholar and/or (b) focused on race/racism, gender/sexism, or intersectionality: Aim 1–Explore Research Trends in Manuscript Review, Publication, and Authorship 1a. Calculate the acceptance and rejection rates of target manuscripts 1b.
Discussion: No discussion notes