WEIRD but Also Inconsistent: An Analysis of the Reporting Practices of Participant Samples Across Five Areas of Psychology

怪异但又不一致:对心理学五个领域参与者样本报告实践的分析

阅读:2

Abstract

In this study, we systematically investigate the Methods sections of five journals covering core areas of Psychology: Social, health, clinical, developmental, and general psychological science. Journals were published by the British Psychology Society between January 2021 and December 2023 (N(articles) = 661; N(samples) = 1293). As expected, we found an over-reliance on Western perspectives: Participants from Latin America, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa made up 8.7% of samples combined. However, we also found substantial variation in whether and where participants' gender, race, SES indicators, and education were reported across different areas of Psychology, as well as different norms in the use of students and crowd-sourcing platforms. Given the challenges of representation in Psychology and the importance of interdisciplinary perspectives, we make a case for a unified standard of reporting that allows readers to more readily access how findings generalise to populations beyond those sampled.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。