Author:
Crawford Jarret T.,Duarte José L.,Haidt Jonathan,Jussim Lee,Stern Charlotta,Tetlock Philip E.
Abstract
AbstractIn our target article, we made four claims: (1) Social psychology is now politically homogeneous; (2) this homogeneity sometimes harms the science; (3) increasing political diversity would reduce this damage; and (4) some portion of the homogeneity is due to a hostile climate and outright discrimination against non-liberals. In this response, we review these claims in light of the arguments made by a diverse group of commentators. We were surprised to find near-universal agreement with our first two claims, and we note that few challenged our fourth claim. Most of the disagreements came in response to our claim that increasing political diversity would be beneficial. We agree with our critics that increasing political diversity may be harder than we had thought, but we explain why we still believe that it is possible and desirable to do so. We conclude with a revised list of 12 recommendations for improving political diversity in social psychology, as well as in other areas of the academy.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Behavioral Neuroscience,Physiology,Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
Reference38 articles.
1. Implicit Bias and Accountability Systems: What Must Organizations Do to Prevent Discrimination?
2. Is there a relationship between political orientation and cognitive ability? A test of three hypotheses in two studies
3. Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations.
4. Crawford J. T. , Brandt M. J. , Chambers J. R. , Inbar Y. , Motyl M. & Wance N. M. (in preparation a) A multi-dimensional approach to political prejudice: Social and economic ideologies differentially predict prejudice across the political spectrum.
5. Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research;Williams;Research in Organizational Behavior,1998
Cited by
24 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献