An Ethics and Social-Justice Approach to Collecting and Using Demographic Data for Psychological Researchers

Author:

Call Christine C.1ORCID,Eckstrand Kristen L.1ORCID,Kasparek Steven W.2ORCID,Boness Cassandra L.3ORCID,Blatt Lorraine4ORCID,Jamal-Orozco Nabila4ORCID,Novacek Derek M.56ORCID,Foti Dan7ORCID,

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh

2. Department of Psychology, Harvard University

3. Center on Alcohol, Substance Use, and Addictions, University of New Mexico

4. Department of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh

5. Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles

6. Desert Pacific Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California

7. Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University

Abstract

The collection and use of demographic data in psychological sciences has the potential to aid in transforming inequities brought about by unjust social conditions toward equity. However, many current methods surrounding demographic data do not achieve this goal. Some methods function to reduce, but not eliminate, inequities, whereas others may perpetuate harmful stereotypes, invalidate minoritized identities, and exclude key groups from research participation or access to disseminated findings. In this article, we aim to (a) review key ethical and social-justice dilemmas inherent to working with demographic data in psychological research and (b) introduce a framework positioned in ethics and social justice to help psychologists and researchers in social-science fields make thoughtful decisions about the collection and use of demographic data. Although demographic data methods vary across subdisciplines and research topics, we assert that these core issues—and solutions—are relevant to all research within the psychological sciences, including basic and applied research. Our overarching aim is to support key stakeholders in psychology (e.g., researchers, funding agencies, journal editors, peer reviewers) in making ethical and socially-just decisions about the collection, analysis, reporting, interpretation, and dissemination of demographic data.

Funder

Division of Graduate Education

National Institute of Mental Health

National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Psychology

Reference81 articles.

1. Revision of Ethical Standard 3.04 of the “Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct” (2002, as amended 2010).

2. American Psychological Association. (2019, August). Bias-free language. https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/bias-free-language

3. APA Task Force on Race and Ethnicity Guidelines in Psychology. (2019). Race and ethnicity guidelines in psychology: Promoting responsiveness and equity. American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.org/about/policy/guidelines-race-ethnicity.pdf

4. The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs to become less American.

5. Psychology's Contributions to Anti-Blackness in the United States within Psychological Research, Criminal Justice, and Mental Health

Cited by 20 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

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3