TY - JOUR
T1 - Bringing an Intersectional Lens to “Open” Science
T2 - An Analysis of Representation in the Reproducibility Project
AU - Sabik, Natalie J.
AU - Matsick, Jes L.
AU - McCormick-Huhn, Kaitlin
AU - Cole, Elizabeth R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2021.
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Feminist psychologists have called for researchers to consider the social and historical context and the multidimensionality of participants in research studies. The Reproducibility Project documents the degree to which the findings from mainstream psychological studies are reproduced. Drawing on intersectionality theory, we question the value of reproducing findings while ignoring who is represented, intersecting social and group identities, sociohistorical context, and the power and privilege that likely influence participants’ responses in psychology experiments. To critically examine the Reproducibility Project in psychology, we analyzed the 100 replication reports produced between 2011 and 2014 (Open Science Collaboration, 2015). We developed an intersectional analytic framework to investigate (a) representation, (b) whether demographic and identity factors were considered through a multidimensional or intersectional lens, (c) explanations of non-replication, and (d) whether socio-cultural context was considered. Results show that reports predominantly include WEIRD samples (people from Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic countries). Context and identity were rarely considered, even when study design relied on these factors, and intersectional identities and structures (considering power, structural issues, discrimination, and historical context) were absent from nearly all reports.
AB - Feminist psychologists have called for researchers to consider the social and historical context and the multidimensionality of participants in research studies. The Reproducibility Project documents the degree to which the findings from mainstream psychological studies are reproduced. Drawing on intersectionality theory, we question the value of reproducing findings while ignoring who is represented, intersecting social and group identities, sociohistorical context, and the power and privilege that likely influence participants’ responses in psychology experiments. To critically examine the Reproducibility Project in psychology, we analyzed the 100 replication reports produced between 2011 and 2014 (Open Science Collaboration, 2015). We developed an intersectional analytic framework to investigate (a) representation, (b) whether demographic and identity factors were considered through a multidimensional or intersectional lens, (c) explanations of non-replication, and (d) whether socio-cultural context was considered. Results show that reports predominantly include WEIRD samples (people from Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic countries). Context and identity were rarely considered, even when study design relied on these factors, and intersectional identities and structures (considering power, structural issues, discrimination, and historical context) were absent from nearly all reports.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85112403996&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85112403996&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/03616843211035678
DO - 10.1177/03616843211035678
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85112403996
SN - 0361-6843
JO - Psychology of Women Quarterly
JF - Psychology of Women Quarterly
ER -