Sites@Rutgers - Rutgers University Websites Made Easy



December 13, 2019A Model of Political Bias in Social Science ResearchNathan Honeycutt Lee JussimRutgers UniversityIn 2019 at the SPSP Political Psychology Pre-Conference, key stakeholders and researchers were invited to debate the question “does ideological diversity impact the quality of our research?” If ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"U8vZtqhf","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Clark & Winegard, in press)","plainCitation":"(Clark & Winegard, in press)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2087,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2087,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"We argue that because of a long history of intergroup conflict and competition, humans evolved\nto be tribal creatures. Tribalism is not inherently bad, but it can lead to ideological thinking and sacred values that distort cognitive processing of putatively objective information in ways that affirm and strengthen the views and well-being of one’s ingroup (and that increase one’s own standing within one’s ingroup). Because of this shared evolutionary history of intergroup conflict, liberals and conservatives likely share the same underlying tribal psychology, which creates the potential for ideologically distorted information processing. Over the past several decades, social scientists have sedulously documented various tribal and ideological psychological tendencies on the political right, and more recent work has documented similar tendencies on the political left. We contend that these tribal tendencies and propensities can lead to ideologically distorted information processing in any group. And this ideological epistemology can become especially problematic for the pursuit of the truth when groups are ideologically homogenous and hold sacred values that might be contradicted by empirical inquiry. Evidence suggests that these conditions might hold for modern social science; therefore, we conclude by exploring potential ideologically driven distortions in the social sciences.","collection-title":"winegar","container-title":"Psychological Inquiry","title":"Tribalism in war and peace: The nature and evolution of ideological epistemology and its significance for modern social science","author":[{"family":"Clark","given":"Cory J."},{"family":"Winegard","given":"Bo M."}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}}],"schema":""} Clark and Winegard's (in press) review of ideological epistemology and its significance to social science is mostly on target, it would predict that many at the debate were unconvinced by those arguing that political bias matters.?Why? To the extent that social psychologists function as a moral tribal community (as Clark and Winegard argue), motivated to protect their professional and political interests, they will fight tooth and nail to defend their sacred values and professional statuses against charges of political bias. Regardless, in the rest of this paper we expand upon two of ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"yAnKIGG7","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Clark & Winegard, in press)","plainCitation":"(Clark & Winegard, in press)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2087,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2087,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"We argue that because of a long history of intergroup conflict and competition, humans evolved\nto be tribal creatures. Tribalism is not inherently bad, but it can lead to ideological thinking and sacred values that distort cognitive processing of putatively objective information in ways that affirm and strengthen the views and well-being of one’s ingroup (and that increase one’s own standing within one’s ingroup). Because of this shared evolutionary history of intergroup conflict, liberals and conservatives likely share the same underlying tribal psychology, which creates the potential for ideologically distorted information processing. Over the past several decades, social scientists have sedulously documented various tribal and ideological psychological tendencies on the political right, and more recent work has documented similar tendencies on the political left. We contend that these tribal tendencies and propensities can lead to ideologically distorted information processing in any group. And this ideological epistemology can become especially problematic for the pursuit of the truth when groups are ideologically homogenous and hold sacred values that might be contradicted by empirical inquiry. Evidence suggests that these conditions might hold for modern social science; therefore, we conclude by exploring potential ideologically driven distortions in the social sciences.","collection-title":"winegar","container-title":"Psychological Inquiry","title":"Tribalism in war and peace: The nature and evolution of ideological epistemology and its significance for modern social science","author":[{"family":"Clark","given":"Cory J."},{"family":"Winegard","given":"Bo M."}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}}],"schema":""} Clark and Winegard's (in press) arguments: 1. there are no reasons to believe that social scientists are immune to the biases, errors, and distortions that stem from tribal loyalties; 2. these tribal tendencies, combined with extreme ideological homogeneity, work to create significant problems for the pursuit of scientific truth. Specifically, we present a heuristic model of political bias that identifies ways they manifest, and we review evidence that bears on it.Equalitarianism as a Primary Source of Scientific Bias ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"7UJmwlqY","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Clark & Winegard, in press)","plainCitation":"(Clark & Winegard, in press)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2087,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2087,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"We argue that because of a long history of intergroup conflict and competition, humans evolved\nto be tribal creatures. Tribalism is not inherently bad, but it can lead to ideological thinking and sacred values that distort cognitive processing of putatively objective information in ways that affirm and strengthen the views and well-being of one’s ingroup (and that increase one’s own standing within one’s ingroup). Because of this shared evolutionary history of intergroup conflict, liberals and conservatives likely share the same underlying tribal psychology, which creates the potential for ideologically distorted information processing. Over the past several decades, social scientists have sedulously documented various tribal and ideological psychological tendencies on the political right, and more recent work has documented similar tendencies on the political left. We contend that these tribal tendencies and propensities can lead to ideologically distorted information processing in any group. And this ideological epistemology can become especially problematic for the pursuit of the truth when groups are ideologically homogenous and hold sacred values that might be contradicted by empirical inquiry. Evidence suggests that these conditions might hold for modern social science; therefore, we conclude by exploring potential ideologically driven distortions in the social sciences.","collection-title":"winegar","container-title":"Psychological Inquiry","title":"Tribalism in war and peace: The nature and evolution of ideological epistemology and its significance for modern social science","author":[{"family":"Clark","given":"Cory J."},{"family":"Winegard","given":"Bo M."}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}}],"schema":""} Clark and Winegard (in press) reviewed some of the ways in which political biases undermine the validity and credibility of social science research. Their review concludes that political bias manifests as theories the field has advanced that flatter liberals and disparage conservatives, as ideologically motivated skepticism against theories and data that challenge liberal positions, and as overrepresentation of liberals in social psychology. Political bias has also emerged in the review of ideologically charged scientific articles, in exaggerating the impact of effects favorable to liberal positions, in ignoring plausible alternative hypotheses, in how some findings are framed and described, and in how findings are discussed. They argue that these problems are particularly acute when scientific findings (and sometimes, even questions) threaten researchers’ sacred values. They further argue that the most sacred value for many social scientists is equalitarianism, by which they refer to a complex of interrelated ideas: 1. There are no biological differences between groups on socially valued traits (and, especially, no genetic differences); 2. Prejudice and discrimination are the only sources of group differences (and anyone who says otherwise is a bigot); and 3. Society has a moral obligation to arrange itself so that all groups are equal on socially valued outcomes.Although their analysis has merit, we also think it does not go far enough, especially with respect to points one and three.?Equalitarianism can, in our view, trigger scientific biases even when claims do not involve biology.?For example, arguing that cultural or religious differences between groups produces unequal outcomes can also trigger equalitarian defensiveness, accusations of bigotry, and biased science.?When Amy Wax argued that differences in the adoption of “bourgeois values” explains many of the outcome differences between blacks and whites in the U.S. ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"enenGi1X","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Wax & Alexander, 2017)","plainCitation":"(Wax & Alexander, 2017)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2174,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2174,"type":"webpage","abstract":"These basic cultural precepts could be followed by people of all backgrounds and abilities, especially when backed up by almost universal endorsement. Adherence was a major contributor to the productivity, educational gains, and social coherence of that period.","container-title":"The Philadelphia Inquirer","language":"en-US","title":"Paying the price for breakdown of the country's bourgeois culture","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Wax","given":"Amy"},{"family":"Alexander","given":"Larry"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017",8,9]]}}}],"schema":""} (Wax & Alexander, 2017), the outraged response was immediate and swift ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"dvMjxInE","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Haidt, 2017)","plainCitation":"(Haidt, 2017)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2172,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2172,"type":"post-weblog","abstract":"Since 2015 we’ve seen an increase in petitions and movements to denounce professors. Typically a professor says or writes something, then a group of students protests. The students demand that the professor be censured or renounced by the university administration, or by his or her colleagues. The event is amplified by social media and by secondary, agenda-driven news outlets, pressuring other professors to take sides and declare themselves publicly. (There is a different script for pressure from right-wing sources off-campus).\n\nThe two highest profile cases so far involved Erika and Nicholas Christakis, at Yale, and Bret Weinstein, at Evergreen. We also had the case of Rebecca Tuvel, a philosopher at Rhodes College, in which the pressure campaign did not come from students but rather from other professors. ?In all of these cases the professor in question was on the left politically, and had said something that most professors did not find offensive. As far as I can tell, most professors outside of the immediate conflict zone supported the accused professors, thought it was inappropriate to subject them to punishment of any kind for what they said or wrote, and thought that these denunciation campaigns ultimately reflected badly on the academy.\n\nNow, in late August, we have a case that may play out differently because the professor in question is a conservative who has made a conservative argument about poverty and culture. She made the argument a few days before the events in Charlottesville. Students at Penn have demanded that the university denounce her, and many of her colleagues did so.","container-title":"Heterodox Academy","language":"en-US","title":"In Defense of Amy Wax's Defense of Bourgeois Values","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Haidt","given":"Jonathan"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017",9,2]]}}}],"schema":""} (Haidt, 2017).?Why? After decades of being inculcated with the evils of “blaming the victim” ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"mJUSNJiC","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Ryan, 1971)","plainCitation":"(Ryan, 1971)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2176,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2176,"type":"book","abstract":"The classic work that refutes the lies we tell ourselves about race, poverty and the poor. Here are three myths about poverty in America: - Minority children perform poorly in school because they are \"culturally deprived.\" - African-Americans are handicapped by a family structure that is typically unstable and matriarchal. - Poor people suffer from bad health because of ignorance and lack of interest in proper health care. Blaming the Victim was the first book to identify these truisms as part of the system of denial that even the best-intentioned Americans have constructed around the unpalatable realities of race and class. Originally published in 1970, William Ryan's groundbreaking and exhaustively researched work challenges both liberal and conservative assumptions, serving up a devastating critique of the mindset that causes us to blame the poor for their poverty and the powerless for their powerlessness. More than twenty years later, it is even more meaningful for its diagnosis of the psychic underpinnings of racial and social injustice.","event-place":"New York","ISBN":"978-0-394-72226-9","language":"en","note":"Google-Books-ID: PoioMFC8R_kC","number-of-pages":"369","publisher":"Vintage Books","publisher-place":"New York","title":"Blaming the Victim","author":[{"family":"Ryan","given":"William"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1971"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Ryan, 1971), any explanation for group differences, whether or not biological, other than discrimination is enough to trigger equalitarian outrage among some scientists. Our point is not that Wax was correct; it is that she made no biological arguments at all.?This is a real-world case in which something other than an attribution to discrimination for group differences on socially valued traits produced the full-blown outrage predicted by Clark and Winegard’s perspective.?The second author of the present paper also notes that simply presenting evidence of the accuracy of stereotypes (without any presumption or evidence bearing on why groups differ) has also produced similar reactions ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"MXehlB4h","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Lehmann, 2015)","plainCitation":"(Lehmann, 2015)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2312,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2312,"type":"post-weblog","abstract":"Lee Jussim and the left wing bias of psychology","container-title":"Quillette","language":"en-AU","title":"How a rebellious scientist uncovered the surprising truth about stereotypes","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Lehmann","given":"Claire"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015",12,4]]}}}],"schema":""} (Lehmann, 2015).We also think their point three is too restrictive.?Sacred equalitarianism may even be a bit of a misnomer. In the extreme, this may go beyond a demand for absolute equality among groups and overflow into a motivation to “turn the tables” (to compensate for past wrongs by placing formerly marginalized groups not on an equal footing, but on a superior one; e.g., ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"vHKeOEdY","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Weinstein, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Weinstein, 2018)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2188,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2188,"type":"interview","title":"Oppression Disguised as Equity","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Weinstein","given":"Bret S."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",5,22]]}}}],"schema":""} Weinstein, 2018).?For example, samples that skew politically left have recently been found to consider companies insufficiently racially diverse unless they have at least 25-32% black representation ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"pt06NsZO","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Danbold & Unzueta, 2019)","plainCitation":"(Danbold & Unzueta, 2019)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2180,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2180,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"This research estimates the points of relative group representation at which members of dominant and nondominant groups declare an organization to be diverse. Across 7 studies, members of dominant groups, relative to members of nondominant groups, reported that diversity was achieved at lower representations of the nondominant group within an organization. This was explained by the dominant group members’ relative opposition to using the equal representation of groups as a standard against which to judge diversity. This mediation was also replicated with the antiegalitarian dimension of social dominance orientation, suggesting that the setting of diversity thresholds serves a hierarchy relevant function. Group differences in thresholds of diversity were strongest when people were evaluating whether an organization was sufficiently (vs. descriptively) diverse, when group status was perceived to be threatened, and when the nondominant group was also a numerical minority in the relevant context. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)","container-title":"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1037/pspi0000182","ISSN":"1939-1315(Electronic),0022-3514(Print)","source":"APA PsycNET","title":"Drawing the diversity line: Numerical thresholds of diversity vary by group status","title-short":"Drawing the diversity line","author":[{"family":"Danbold","given":"Felix"},{"family":"Unzueta","given":"Miguel M."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Danbold & Unzueta, 2019). Because blacks only make up about 13% of the U.S. population ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"bj2kIJgn","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(U.S. Census Bureau, 2018)","plainCitation":"(U.S. Census Bureau, 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2299,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2299,"type":"webpage","abstract":"Frequently requested statistics for: United States","language":"en","title":"U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: United States","title-short":"U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts","URL":"","author":[{"literal":"U.S. Census Bureau"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",7,1]]}}}],"schema":""} (U.S. Census Bureau, 2018) this is plausibly viewed as a turn the tables implicit endorsement of discrimination against other groups. Similarly, much (we suspect most) of the discourse about sexist bias in education, academia, STEM, and even psychology emphasizes the difficulties women face ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"0F4es2ZE","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Brown & Goh, 2016; Greider et al., 2019; Handelsman et al., 2005; Knobloch-Westerwick, Glynn, & Huge, 2013; Ledgerwood, Haines, & Ratliff, 2015; Milkman, Akinola, & Chugh, 2012; Moss-Racusin, Dovidio, Brescoll, Graham, & Handelsman, 2012; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2018; Nature, 2015; J Steele, James, & Barnett, 2016; Steinpreis, Anders, & Ritzke, 1999; United States National Academy of Sciences, 2007; Wenneras & Wold, 1997)","plainCitation":"(Brown & Goh, 2016; Greider et al., 2019; Handelsman et al., 2005; Knobloch-Westerwick, Glynn, & Huge, 2013; Ledgerwood, Haines, & Ratliff, 2015; Milkman, Akinola, & Chugh, 2012; Moss-Racusin, Dovidio, Brescoll, Graham, & Handelsman, 2012; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2018; Nature, 2015; J Steele, James, & Barnett, 2016; Steinpreis, Anders, & Ritzke, 1999; United States National Academy of Sciences, 2007; Wenneras & Wold, 1997)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1755,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1755,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"This research examined a possible gender gap in personality and social psychology. According to membership demographics from the Society for Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP), women and men are represented near parity in the field. Yet despite this equal representation, the field may still suffer from a different type of gender gap. We examined the gender of first authors in two major journals, citations to these articles, and gender of award recipients. In random samples of five issues per year across 10 years (2004–2013; N = 1,094), 34% of first authors in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology were women and 44% of first authors in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin were women. Articles authored by men were cited more than those authored by women. In examining the gender of award recipients given by SPSP (2000–2016), on average, 25% of the recipients were women.","container-title":"Social Psychological and Personality Science","DOI":"10.1177/1948550616644297","ISSN":"1948-5506","issue":"5","journalAbbreviation":"Social Psychological and Personality Science","language":"en","page":"437-443","source":"SAGE Journals","title":"Some Evidence for a Gender Gap in Personality and Social Psychology","volume":"7","author":[{"family":"Brown","given":"Adam J."},{"family":"Goh","given":"Jin X."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016",7,1]]}}},{"id":2272,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2272,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Women experience substantial, gender-specific barriers that can impede their advancement in research careers. These include unconscious biases that negatively influence the perception of women's abilities, as well as social and cultural factors like those that lead to an unequal distribution of domestic labor (1, 2). Additionally, sexual and gender-based harassment is a widespread and pernicious impediment to the retention and advancement of women in many science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)–related fields (3). Although there is substantial evidence documenting systemic barriers that women face in scientific careers, less is known about how research institutions and funding agencies can best address these problems (see references below and in the supplementary materials). We outline here specific, potentially high-impact policy changes that build upon existing mechanisms for research funding and governance and that can be rapidly implemented to counteract barriers facing women in science. These approaches must be coupled to vigorous and continuous outcomes-based monitoring, so that the most successful strategies can be disseminated and widely implemented. Though our professional focus is primarily academic biomedical research in U.S. institutions, we suggest that some of the approaches that we discuss may be broadly useful across STEM disciplines and outside of academia as well.\nPolicies must address harassment and bias\nPolicies must address harassment and bias","container-title":"Science","DOI":"10.1126/science.aaz0649","ISSN":"0036-8075, 1095-9203","issue":"6466","language":"en","note":"PMID: 31699926","page":"692-695","source":"science.","title":"Increasing gender diversity in the STEM research workforce","volume":"366","author":[{"family":"Greider","given":"Carol W."},{"family":"Sheltzer","given":"Jason M."},{"family":"Cantalupo","given":"Nancy C."},{"family":"Copeland","given":"Wilbert B."},{"family":"Dasgupta","given":"Nilanjana"},{"family":"Hopkins","given":"Nancy"},{"family":"Jansen","given":"Jaclyn M."},{"family":"Joshua-Tor","given":"Leemor"},{"family":"McDowell","given":"Gary S."},{"family":"Metcalf","given":"Jessica L."},{"family":"McLaughlin","given":"BethAnn"},{"family":"Olivarius","given":"Ann"},{"family":"O'Shea","given":"Erin K."},{"family":"Raymond","given":"Jennifer L."},{"family":"Ruebain","given":"David"},{"family":"Steitz","given":"Joan A."},{"family":"Stillman","given":"Bruce"},{"family":"Tilghman","given":"Shirley M."},{"family":"Valian","given":"Virginia"},{"family":"Villa-Komaroff","given":"Lydia"},{"family":"Wong","given":"Joyce Y."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019",11,8]]}}},{"id":1583,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1583,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"<p> Universities are failing to take advantage of an available resource: the brainpower of women scientists. In many fields of science, the proportion of women in faculty positions lags well behind the proportion of Ph.D.9s granted to women. In this Policy Forum, the authors explore the reasons for the disparity and offer examples of strategies used at research universities to overcome the impediments to recruitment, retention, and advancement of outstanding women scientists. </p>","container-title":"Science","DOI":"10.1126/science.1113252","ISSN":"0036-8075, 1095-9203","issue":"5738","language":"en","note":"PMID: 16109868","page":"1190-1191","source":"science.","title":"More Women in Science","volume":"309","author":[{"family":"Handelsman","given":"Jo"},{"family":"Cantor","given":"Nancy"},{"family":"Carnes","given":"Molly"},{"family":"Denton","given":"Denice"},{"family":"Fine","given":"Eve"},{"family":"Grosz","given":"Barbara"},{"family":"Hinshaw","given":"Virginia"},{"family":"Marrett","given":"Cora"},{"family":"Rosser","given":"Sue"},{"family":"Shalala","given":"Donna"},{"family":"Sheridan","given":"Jennifer"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2005",8,19]]}}},{"id":1473,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1473,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"An experiment with 243 young communication scholars tested hypotheses derived from role congruity theory regarding impacts of author gender and gender typing of research topics on perceived quality of scientific publications and collaboration interest. Participants rated conference abstracts ostensibly authored by females or males, with author associations rotated. The abstracts fell into research areas perceived as gender-typed or gender-neutral to ascertain impacts from gender typing of topics. Publications from male authors were associated with greater scientific quality, in particular if the topic was male-typed. Collaboration interest was highest for male authors working on male-typed topics. Respondent sex did not influence these patterns.","container-title":"Science Communication","DOI":"10.1177/1075547012472684","ISSN":"1075-5470","issue":"5","journalAbbreviation":"Science Communication","language":"en","page":"603-625","source":"SAGE Journals","title":"The Matilda Effect in Science Communication: An Experiment on Gender Bias in Publication Quality Perceptions and Collaboration Interest","title-short":"The Matilda Effect in Science Communication","volume":"35","author":[{"family":"Knobloch-Westerwick","given":"Silvia"},{"family":"Glynn","given":"Carroll J."},{"family":"Huge","given":"Michael"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2013",10,1]]}}},{"id":2287,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2287,"type":"webpage","abstract":"Not nutting up or shutting up: Notes on the demographic disconnect in our field’s best practices conversation Alison Ledgerwood, Elizabeth Haines, and Kate Ratliff A few weeks ago, two of us chaired a symposium on best practices at SPSP focusing on concrete steps that researchers can take right now to...","title":"Guest Post: Not Nutting Up or Shutting Up","title-short":"Guest Post","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Ledgerwood","given":"Alison"},{"family":"Haines","given":"Elizabeth"},{"family":"Ratliff","given":"Kate"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015"]]}}},{"id":1455,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1455,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Through a field experiment set in academia (with a sample of 6,548 professors), we found that decisions about distant-future events were more likely to generate discrimination against women and minorities (relative to Caucasian males) than were decisions about near-future events. In our study, faculty members received e-mails from fictional prospective doctoral students seeking to schedule a meeting either that day or in 1 week; students’ names signaled their race (Caucasian, African American, Hispanic, Indian, or Chinese) and gender. When the requests were to meet in 1 week, Caucasian males were granted access to faculty members 26% more often than were women and minorities; also, compared with women and minorities, Caucasian males received more and faster responses. However, these patterns were essentially eliminated when prospective students requested a meeting that same day. Our identification of a temporal discrimination effect is consistent with the predictions of construal-level theory and implies that subtle contextual shifts can alter patterns of race- and gender-based discrimination.","container-title":"Psychological Science","DOI":"10.1177/0956797611434539","issue":"7","note":"PMID: 22614463","page":"710-717","title":"Temporal Distance and Discrimination: An Audit Study in Academia","volume":"23","author":[{"family":"Milkman","given":"Katherine L."},{"family":"Akinola","given":"Modupe"},{"family":"Chugh","given":"Dolly"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2012"]]}}},{"id":778,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":778,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences","issue":"41","page":"16474–16479","title":"Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students","volume":"109","author":[{"family":"Moss-Racusin","given":"Corinne A"},{"family":"Dovidio","given":"John F"},{"family":"Brescoll","given":"Victoria L"},{"family":"Graham","given":"Mark J"},{"family":"Handelsman","given":"Jo"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2012"]]}}},{"id":"oAglqpji/k6ef5Qss","uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2276,"type":"book","abstract":"Over the last few decades, research, activity, and funding has been devoted to improving the recruitment, retention, and advancement of women in the fields of science, engineering, and medicine. In recent years the diversity of those participating in these fields, particularly the participation of women, has improved and there are significantly more women entering careers and studying science, engineering, and medicine than ever before. However, as women increasingly enter these fields they face biases and barriers and it is not surprising that sexual harassment is one of these barriers. Over thirty years the incidence of sexual harassment in different industries has held steady, yet now more women are in the workforce and in academia, and in the fields of science, engineering, and medicine (as students and faculty) and so more women are experiencing sexual harassment as they work and learn. Over the last several years, revelations of the sexual harassment experienced by women in the workplace and in academic settings have raised urgent questions about the specific impact of this discriminatory behavior on women and the extent to which it is limiting their careers. Sexual Harassment of Women explores the influence of sexual harassment in academia on the career advancement of women in the scientific, technical, and medical workforce. This report reviews the research on the extent to which women in the fields of science, engineering, and medicine are victimized by sexual harassment and examines the existing information on the extent to which sexual harassment in academia negatively impacts the recruitment, retention, and advancement of women pursuing scientific, engineering, technical, and medical careers. It also identifies and analyzes the policies, strategies and practices that have been the most successful in preventing and addressing sexual harassment in these settings.","ISBN":"978-0-309-47087-2","language":"en","note":"Google-Books-ID: uyZnDwAAQBAJ","number-of-pages":"313","publisher":"National Academies Press","source":"Google Books","title":"Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine","title-short":"Sexual Harassment of Women","author":[{"literal":"National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",9,1]]}}},{"id":2289,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2289,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"The comments about women in the laboratory made by Nobel laureate Tim Hunt are a reminder that equality in science is a battle still far from won.","container-title":"Nature","DOI":"10.1038/522255a","ISSN":"1476-4687","issue":"7556","journalAbbreviation":"Nature","language":"en","page":"255-255","source":"","title":"Sexism has no place in science","volume":"522","author":[{"literal":"Nature"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015",6]]}}},{"id":2283,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2283,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"This study examined the perceptions of undergraduate women in male-dominated academic areas. First-year and final-year female undergraduates in a male-dominated...","archive_location":"Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA","container-title":"Psychology of Women Quarterly","ISSN":"10.1111/1471-6402.00042","language":"en","source":"journals.","title":"Learning in a Man's World: Examining the Perceptions of Undergraduate Women in Male-Dominated Academic Areas:","title-short":"Learning in a Man's World","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Steele","given":"J"},{"family":"James","given":"Jacquelyn B."},{"family":"Barnett","given":"Rosalind Chait"}],"accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",12,12]]},"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016",6,24]]}}},{"id":1467,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1467,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"The purpose of this study was to determine someof the factors that influence outside reviewers andsearch committee members when they are reviewingcurricula vitae, particularly with respect to the gender of the name on the vitae. The participants inthis study were 238 male and female academicpsychologists who listed a university address in the1997 Directory of the American PsychologicalAssociation. They were each sent one of four versions of acurriculum vitae (i.e., female job applicant, male jobapplicant, female tenure candidate, and male tenurecandidate), along with a questionnaire and aself-addressed stamped envelope. All the curricula vitaeactually came from a real-life scientist at twodifferent stages in her career, but the names werechanged to traditional male and female names. Althoughan exclusively between-groups design was used to avoidsparking genderconscious responding, the resultsindicate that the participants were clearly able todistinguish between the qualifications of the jobapplicants versus the tenure candidates, as evidenced bysuggesting higher starting salaries, increasedlikelihood of offering the tenure candidates a job,granting them tenure, and greater respect for theirteaching, research, and service records. Both men andwomen were more likely to vote to hire a male jobapplicant than a female job applicant with an identicalrecord. Similarly, both sexes reported that the male job applicant had done adequate teaching,research, and service experience compared to the femalejob applicant with an identical record. In contrast,when men and women examined the highly competitive curriculum vitae of the real-life scientist whohad gotten early tenure, they were equally likely totenure the male and female tenure candidates and therewas no difference in their ratings of their teaching, research, and service experience. There was nosignificant main effect for the quality of theinstitution or professional rank on selectivity inhiring and tenuring decisions. The results of this study indicate a gender bias for both men and womenin preference for male job applicants.","container-title":"Sex Roles","DOI":"10.1023/A:1018839203698","ISSN":"1573-2762","issue":"7","journalAbbreviation":"Sex Roles","language":"en","page":"509-528","source":"Springer Link","title":"The Impact of Gender on the Review of the Curricula Vitae of Job Applicants and Tenure Candidates: A National Empirical Study","title-short":"The Impact of Gender on the Review of the Curricula Vitae of Job Applicants and Tenure Candidates","volume":"41","author":[{"family":"Steinpreis","given":"Rhea E."},{"family":"Anders","given":"Katie A."},{"family":"Ritzke","given":"Dawn"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1999",10,1]]}}},{"id":2292,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2292,"type":"report","event-place":"Washington, DC","publisher":"National Academies Press","publisher-place":"Washington, DC","title":"Beyond bias and barriers: Fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering","author":[{"literal":"United States National Academy of Sciences"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2007"]]}}},{"id":1648,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1648,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Nature","DOI":"10.1038/387341a0","ISSN":"0028-0836","issue":"6631","journalAbbreviation":"Nature","language":"eng","note":"PMID: 9163412","page":"341-343","source":"PubMed","title":"Nepotism and sexism in peer-review","volume":"387","author":[{"family":"Wenneras","given":"C."},{"family":"Wold","given":"A."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1997",5,22]]}}}],"schema":""} (e.g., Brown & Goh, 2016; Greider et al., 2019; Handelsman et al., 2005; Knobloch-Westerwick, Glynn, & Huge, 2013; Ledgerwood, Haines, & Ratliff, 2015; Milkman, Akinola, & Chugh, 2012; Moss-Racusin, Dovidio, Brescoll, Graham, & Handelsman, 2012; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2018; Nature, 2015; Steele, James, & Barnett, 2016; Steinpreis, Anders, & Ritzke, 1999; United States National Academy of Sciences, 2007; Wenneras & Wold, 1997). Nonetheless, women now represent a majority of social psychologists, most of the leadership in at least one of the main social psychology professional organizations ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"6VKLEDHT","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(SPSP, 2019)","plainCitation":"(SPSP, 2019)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2308,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2308,"type":"webpage","title":"Society for Personality and Social Psychology: Leadership","URL":"","author":[{"literal":"SPSP"}],"accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",12,12]]},"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":""} (SPSP, 2019), a majority of psychologists ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"dcTnWp4O","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(American Psychological Association, 2015, 2018)","plainCitation":"(American Psychological Association, 2015, 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2295,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2295,"type":"report","abstract":"Demographics of members including gender, race/ethnicity, employment and major.","event-place":"Washington, D.C.","language":"en","publisher-place":"Washington, D.C.","title":"Demographic Characteristics of APA Members by Membership Characteristics, 2014","URL":"","author":[{"literal":"American Psychological Association"}],"accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",12,12]]},"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015"]]}}},{"id":2293,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2293,"type":"report","abstract":"The report presents a update on the demographic characteristics of the psychology workforce based on data from the American Community Survey.","event-place":"Washington, D.C.","language":"en","publisher-place":"Washington, D.C.","title":"Demographics of the U.S. psychology workforce: Findings from the 2007-16 American Community Survey","URL":"","author":[{"literal":"American Psychological Association"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":""} (American Psychological Association, 2015, 2018), and have been more likely to complete high school, college, and graduate degrees than have men for about 40 years ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"qLIO4pk5","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Sharp, 2010)","plainCitation":"(Sharp, 2010)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2185,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2185,"type":"post-weblog","abstract":"The Society Pages (TSP) is an open-access social science project headquartered in the Department of Sociology at the University of Minnesota","container-title":"The Society Pages: Sociological Images","language":"en","title":"Sex, College Degrees, and Campus Equity - Sociological Images","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Sharp","given":"Gwen"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2010",5,22]]}}}],"schema":""} (Sharp, 2010). If absolute equality was the only driver of motivated bias, one would be witnessing a dramatic upsurge in claims emphasizing biases against and obstacles to the success and representation of boys and men, given that inequality in these areas now favors women.?That so much of the social science effort focuses on biases against women, and so little on those against men, even after women have largely turned the tables in these areas, is plausibly interpretable as indicating that, for some scholars, it is not equality per se that is held sacred. We agree with ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"uttE5CqM","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Clark & Winegard, in press)","plainCitation":"(Clark & Winegard, in press)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2087,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2087,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"We argue that because of a long history of intergroup conflict and competition, humans evolved\nto be tribal creatures. Tribalism is not inherently bad, but it can lead to ideological thinking and sacred values that distort cognitive processing of putatively objective information in ways that affirm and strengthen the views and well-being of one’s ingroup (and that increase one’s own standing within one’s ingroup). Because of this shared evolutionary history of intergroup conflict, liberals and conservatives likely share the same underlying tribal psychology, which creates the potential for ideologically distorted information processing. Over the past several decades, social scientists have sedulously documented various tribal and ideological psychological tendencies on the political right, and more recent work has documented similar tendencies on the political left. We contend that these tribal tendencies and propensities can lead to ideologically distorted information processing in any group. And this ideological epistemology can become especially problematic for the pursuit of the truth when groups are ideologically homogenous and hold sacred values that might be contradicted by empirical inquiry. Evidence suggests that these conditions might hold for modern social science; therefore, we conclude by exploring potential ideologically driven distortions in the social sciences.","collection-title":"winegar","container-title":"Psychological Inquiry","title":"Tribalism in war and peace: The nature and evolution of ideological epistemology and its significance for modern social science","author":[{"family":"Clark","given":"Cory J."},{"family":"Winegard","given":"Bo M."}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}}],"schema":""} Clark and Winegard's (in press) articulation of where political bias can emerge, and the problems it creates for social science research. Nonetheless, their review was not intended to be comprehensive, and we believe political biases can also manifest in many additional ways. In the remainder of this article, therefore, we propose and present evidence for a preliminary theoretical model of how political biases manifests in social science. A Preliminary Theoretical Model for Manifestations of Political Bias in Social ScienceBuilding upon the evidence offered by ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"azRSzudM","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Clark & Winegard, in press)","plainCitation":"(Clark & Winegard, in press)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2087,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2087,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"We argue that because of a long history of intergroup conflict and competition, humans evolved\nto be tribal creatures. Tribalism is not inherently bad, but it can lead to ideological thinking and sacred values that distort cognitive processing of putatively objective information in ways that affirm and strengthen the views and well-being of one’s ingroup (and that increase one’s own standing within one’s ingroup). Because of this shared evolutionary history of intergroup conflict, liberals and conservatives likely share the same underlying tribal psychology, which creates the potential for ideologically distorted information processing. Over the past several decades, social scientists have sedulously documented various tribal and ideological psychological tendencies on the political right, and more recent work has documented similar tendencies on the political left. We contend that these tribal tendencies and propensities can lead to ideologically distorted information processing in any group. And this ideological epistemology can become especially problematic for the pursuit of the truth when groups are ideologically homogenous and hold sacred values that might be contradicted by empirical inquiry. Evidence suggests that these conditions might hold for modern social science; therefore, we conclude by exploring potential ideologically driven distortions in the social sciences.","collection-title":"winegar","container-title":"Psychological Inquiry","title":"Tribalism in war and peace: The nature and evolution of ideological epistemology and its significance for modern social science","author":[{"family":"Clark","given":"Cory J."},{"family":"Winegard","given":"Bo M."}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}}],"schema":""} Clark and Winegard (in press), we propose a preliminary heuristic theoretical model identifying key ways in which political biases may manifest in the scientific enterprise: who becomes an academic social scientist, the questions asked, measurement, interpretation of findings, suppression of ideas and findings, citations, and the canonization of research findings (Figure 1). Who Becomes an Academic Social ScientistBoth informal and formal quantitative investigations indicate that social scientists (including social psychologists) are decidedly left-leaning, and that conservatives are the most underrepresented group in the social sciences ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"lv5EO9vz","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Al-Gharbi, 2018; Haidt, 2011; Inbar & Lammers, 2012; SPSP Diversity and Climate Committee, 2019; Von Hippel & Buss, 2017)","plainCitation":"(Al-Gharbi, 2018; Haidt, 2011; Inbar & Lammers, 2012; SPSP Diversity and Climate Committee, 2019; Von Hippel & Buss, 2017)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2095,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2095,"type":"post-weblog","abstract":"A statistical analysis of how the lack of ideological diversity on campus compares to underrepresentation along the lines of gender, race or sexuality.","container-title":"Heterodox Academy","language":"en-US","title":"Underrepresentation: Race, Gender, Sexuality, Ideology","title-short":"Underrepresentation","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Al-Gharbi","given":"Musa"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",3,29]]}}},{"id":1048,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1048,"type":"speech","event-place":"Talk given at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, San Antonio, TX","publisher-place":"Talk given at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, San Antonio, TX","title":"The bright future of post-partisan social psychology","URL":"*jdh6n/postpartisan.html","author":[{"family":"Haidt","given":"Jonathan"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2011",1]]}}},{"id":47,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":47,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","issue":"5","page":"496–503","title":"Political diversity in social and personality psychology","volume":"7","author":[{"family":"Inbar","given":"Yoel"},{"family":"Lammers","given":"Joris"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2012"]]}}},{"id":2092,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2092,"type":"report","title":"SPSP diversity and climate survey","URL":"","author":[{"literal":"SPSP Diversity and Climate Committee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019",1]]}}},{"id":1366,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1366,"type":"chapter","container-title":"The Politics of Social Psychology","event-place":"New York","page":"17–35","publisher":"Psychology Press","publisher-place":"New York","title":"Do ideologically driven scientific agendas impede the understanding and acceptance of evolutionary principles in social psychology?","author":[{"family":"Von Hippel","given":"William"},{"family":"Buss","given":"David M"}],"editor":[{"literal":"Crawford, J.T."},{"literal":"Jussim, L."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Al-Gharbi, 2018; Haidt, 2011; Inbar & Lammers, 2012; SPSP Diversity and Climate Committee, 2019; Von Hippel & Buss, 2017). For example, the Society for Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP; the largest professional organization for social and personality psychologists) released a report on diversity and the climate within their organization ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"WbidO3iA","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(SPSP Diversity and Climate Committee, 2019)","plainCitation":"(SPSP Diversity and Climate Committee, 2019)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2092,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2092,"type":"report","title":"SPSP diversity and climate survey","URL":"","author":[{"literal":"SPSP Diversity and Climate Committee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019",1]]}}}],"schema":""} (SPSP Diversity and Climate Committee, 2019). Conservatives constituted 4% of the SPSP membership, whereas they constitute 35% of the U.S. population (Gallup, 2018).?By comparison, African Americans constitute only 4.1% of the membership of SPSP whereas they constitute 13.4% of the U.S. population ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"CU3z0wQE","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(U.S. Census Bureau, 2018)","plainCitation":"(U.S. Census Bureau, 2018)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2299,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2299,"type":"webpage","abstract":"Frequently requested statistics for: United States","language":"en","title":"U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: United States","title-short":"U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts","URL":"","author":[{"literal":"U.S. Census Bureau"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",7,1]]}}}],"schema":""} (U.S. Census Bureau, 2018; the membership of SPSP is 84% U.S., so this benchmark seems reasonable). Thus, African Americans are underrepresented by about 70% and conservatives are underrepresented by almost 90%. Further, this general pattern is common throughout the academy more broadly ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"yXTEtzRU","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Langbert, 2018; Stolzenberg et al., 2019)","plainCitation":"(Langbert, 2018; Stolzenberg et al., 2019)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2089,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2089,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Academic Questions","DOI":"10.1007/s12129-018-9700-x","ISSN":"1936-4709","issue":"2","journalAbbreviation":"Acad. Quest.","language":"en","page":"186-197","source":"Springer Link","title":"Homogenous: The Political Affiliations of Elite Liberal Arts College Faculty","title-short":"Homogenous","volume":"31","author":[{"family":"Langbert","given":"Mitchell"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",6,1]]}}},{"id":2088,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2088,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA","title":"Undergraduate teaching faculty: The HERI Faculty Survey 2016–2017","author":[{"family":"Stolzenberg","given":"EB"},{"family":"Eagan","given":"MK"},{"family":"Zimmerman","given":"HB"},{"family":"Berdan Lozano","given":"J"},{"family":"Cesar-Davis","given":"NM"},{"family":"Aragon","given":"MC"},{"family":"Rios-Aguilar","given":"C"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Langbert, 2018; Stolzenberg et al., 2019).Role models. In the academy, concerns have frequently been raised about the lack of representation and role models available for students from underrepresented groups, particularly in terms of race, ethnicity, and gender ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"iUbONdLX","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Dasgupta & Stout, 2014; Dee, 2004; Murphy, Steele, & Gross, 2007)","plainCitation":"(Dasgupta & Stout, 2014; Dee, 2004; Murphy, Steele, & Gross, 2007)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":596,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":596,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Scientific advances fuel American economic competitiveness, quality of life, and national security. Much of the future job growth is projected in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). However, the supply of domestic students who pursue STEM careers remains small relative to the demand. On the supply side, girls and women represent untapped human capital that, if leveraged, could enhance the STEM workforce, given that they comprise 50% of the American population and more than 50% of the college-bound population. Yet the scarcity of women in STEM careers remains stark. What drives these gender disparities in STEM? And what are the solutions? Research points to different answers depending on the stage of human development. Distinct obstacles occur during three developmental periods: (a) childhood and adolescence, (b) emerging adulthood, and (c) young-to-middle adulthood. This article describes how specific learning environments, peer relations, and family characteristics become obstacles to STEM interest, achievement, and persistence in each period. Evidence-based policies and programs promise to eliminate these obstacles, increasing girls and women’s participation in STEM.","container-title":"Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences","DOI":"10.1177/2372732214549471","ISSN":"2372-7322, 2372-7330","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences","language":"en","page":"21-29","source":"bbs.","title":"Girls and women in Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics STEMing the tide and broadening participation in STEM careers","volume":"1","author":[{"family":"Dasgupta","given":"Nilanjana"},{"family":"Stout","given":"Jane G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2014",10,1]]}}},{"id":182,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":182,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Recommendations for the aggressive recruitment of minority teachers are based on hypothesized role-model effects for minority students as well as evidence of racial biases among nonminority teachers. However, prior empirical studies have found little or no association between exposure to an own-race teacher and student achievement. This paper presents new evidence on this question by examining the test score data from Tennessee's Project STAR class-size experiment, which randomly matched students and teachers within participating schools. Specification checks confirm that the racial pairings of students and teachers in this experiment were unrelated to other student traits. Models of student achievement indicate that assignment to an own-race teacher significantly increased the math and reading achievement of both black and white students.","container-title":"Review of Economics and Statistics","DOI":"10.1162/003465304323023750","ISSN":"0034-6535","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Review of Economics and Statistics","page":"195-210","source":"MIT Press Journals","title":"Teachers, race, and student achievement in a randomized experiment","volume":"86","author":[{"family":"Dee","given":"Thomas S."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2004",2,1]]}}},{"id":258,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":258,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"This study examined the cues hypothesis, which holds that situational cues, such as a setting's features and organization, can make potential targets vulnerable to social identity threat. Objective and subjective measures of identity threat were collected from male and female math, science, and engineering (MSE) majors who watched an MSE conference video depicting either an unbalanced ratio of men to women or a balanced ratio. Women who viewed the unbalanced video exhibited more cognitive and physiological vigilance, and reported a lower sense of belonging and less desire to participate in the conference, than did women who viewed the gender-balanced video. Men were unaffected by this situational cue. The implications for understanding vulnerability to social identity threat, particularly among women in MSE settings, are discussed.","container-title":"Psychological Science","DOI":"10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01995.x","ISSN":"0956-7976, 1467-9280","issue":"10","journalAbbreviation":"Psychological Science","language":"en","note":"PMID: 17894605","page":"879-885","source":"pss.","title":"Signaling Threat How Situational Cues Affect Women in Math, Science, and Engineering Settings","volume":"18","author":[{"family":"Murphy","given":"Mary C."},{"family":"Steele","given":"Claude M."},{"family":"Gross","given":"James J."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2007",10,1]]}}}],"schema":""} (e.g., Dasgupta & Stout, 2014; Dee, 2004; Murphy, Steele, & Gross, 2007). The core idea is that mentorship is important ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"eBGcFfcf","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Reinero, 2019)","plainCitation":"(Reinero, 2019)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2235,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2235,"type":"webpage","abstract":"What does it take to land a top academic job? A look at new data shows that the job market is competitive and that publications matter, but it’s not the whole story. Mentorship matters more than we think – both in getting the job and succeeding at it.","container-title":"Behavioural and Social Sciences at Nature Research","language":"en","title":"The path to professorship by the numbers and why mentorship matters","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Reinero","given":"Diego A."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019",10,22]]}}}],"schema":""} (Reinero, 2019); if students don’t find successful role models like themselves, they are less likely to pursue a career in that discipline.?For example, referring to women in STEM, ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"GpxYLS0c","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Dasgupta & Stout, 2014, p. 24)","plainCitation":"(Dasgupta & Stout, 2014, p. 24)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":596,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":596,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Scientific advances fuel American economic competitiveness, quality of life, and national security. Much of the future job growth is projected in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). However, the supply of domestic students who pursue STEM careers remains small relative to the demand. On the supply side, girls and women represent untapped human capital that, if leveraged, could enhance the STEM workforce, given that they comprise 50% of the American population and more than 50% of the college-bound population. Yet the scarcity of women in STEM careers remains stark. What drives these gender disparities in STEM? And what are the solutions? Research points to different answers depending on the stage of human development. Distinct obstacles occur during three developmental periods: (a) childhood and adolescence, (b) emerging adulthood, and (c) young-to-middle adulthood. This article describes how specific learning environments, peer relations, and family characteristics become obstacles to STEM interest, achievement, and persistence in each period. Evidence-based policies and programs promise to eliminate these obstacles, increasing girls and women’s participation in STEM.","container-title":"Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences","DOI":"10.1177/2372732214549471","ISSN":"2372-7322, 2372-7330","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences","language":"en","page":"21-29","source":"bbs.","title":"Girls and women in Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics STEMing the tide and broadening participation in STEM careers","volume":"1","author":[{"family":"Dasgupta","given":"Nilanjana"},{"family":"Stout","given":"Jane G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2014",10,1]]}},"locator":"24"}],"schema":""} Dasgupta and Stout (2014, p. 24) argue that “Young adults identify with successful female role models whose presence allows them to think: ‘If she can be successful, so can I’ and ‘I want to be like her.’”?Given the support for the gender similarity hypothesis ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"0wUoIe04","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Hyde, 2005)","plainCitation":"(Hyde, 2005)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1531,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1531,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"The differences model, which argues that males and fe- males are vastly different psychologically, dominates the popular media. Here, the author advances a very different view, the gender similarities hypothesis, which holds that males and females are similar on most, but not all, psy- chological variables. Results from a review of 46 meta- analyses support the gender similarities hypothesis. Gender differences can vary substantially in magnitude at different ages and depend on the context in which measurement occurs. Overinflated claims of gender differences carry substantial costs in areas such as the workplace and relationships.","container-title":"American Psychologist","issue":"6","page":"581-592","title":"The gender similarities hypothesis","volume":"60","author":[{"family":"Hyde","given":"Janet Shibley"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2005"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Hyde, 2005), we know of no reason to believe that this sort of social psychological process is unique to women, and there are many to think that they probably apply widely (Reinero, 2019, including to political role models in the social sciences ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"NDNvtseQ","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Honeycutt & Freberg, 2017; Honeycutt, Jussim, & Freberg, 2019)","plainCitation":"(Honeycutt & Freberg, 2017; Honeycutt, Jussim, & Freberg, 2019)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":963,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":963,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Inbar and Lammers asked members of APA Division 8 (personality and social psychology) about their political orientation, hostility experienced related to their political orientation, and their willingness to discriminate against others based on perceived political orientation. In this replication and extension, 618 faculty members from various academic disciplines across four California State University campuses completed an online questionnaire that added parallel questions about the liberal experience to the original questions about the conservative experience. Participants were overwhelmingly liberal in self-report across all academic areas except agriculture. The conservative minority reported experiencing more hostility than the liberal majority, but both groups expressed similar “in-group/out-group” attitudes. Results supported the ideological-conflict hypothesis for discrimination and a “birds of a feather flock together” interpretation of the lack of political diversity among the professoriate.","container-title":"Social Psychological and Personality Science","DOI":"10.1177/1948550616667617","ISSN":"1948-5506","issue":"2","journalAbbreviation":"Social Psychological and Personality Science","language":"en","page":"115-123","source":"SAGE Journals","title":"The liberal and conservative experience across academic disciplines: An extension of Inbar and Lammers","title-short":"The Liberal and Conservative Experience Across Academic Disciplines","volume":"8","author":[{"family":"Honeycutt","given":"Nathan"},{"family":"Freberg","given":"Laura"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017",3,1]]}}},{"id":1929,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1929,"type":"manuscript","event-place":"Working paper","publisher-place":"Working paper","title":"University students’ perceptions of the classroom political climate","author":[{"family":"Honeycutt","given":"Nathan"},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Freberg","given":"Laura"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Honeycutt & Freberg, 2017; Honeycutt, Jussim, & Freberg, 2019). If non-liberal students do not have faculty who share their beliefs and values, this may dissuade some from furthering their studies, and from pursuing academic careers ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"7zB0B6q9","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(R. E. Redding, 2012)","plainCitation":"(R. E. Redding, 2012)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1009,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1009,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Inbar and Lammers (2012, this issue) contribute to the growing empirical evidence of discrimination against conservative (i.e., right-of-center) people and ideas not only in social and personality psychology, but within the academy generally. Because sociopolitical values are often a core component of self-identity that significantly impact our interpersonal relationships, sociopolitical discrimination is difficult to overcome. There is a tendency to marginalize the sociopolitical “other,” along with a groupthink that implicitly presupposes that this form of discrimination is acceptable (e.g., because conservatives are self-interestedly motivated, conservative ideas are incorrect, or conservatism is well represented elsewhere in society and thus need not be in the academy). Yet discrimination must be overcome because sociopolitical diversity is vital for scholarly inquiry, pedagogy, and for ethical professional practice. Recent research suggests that the assumptions underlying psychology’s value system of promoting racial, ethnic, gender, or sexual orientation diversity—that is, that doing so recognizes people’s personal identities, ameliorates discrimination, and has educational benefits—may be all the more compelling with respect to sociopolitical ideas.","container-title":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","DOI":"10.1177/1745691612455206","ISSN":"1745-6916","issue":"5","journalAbbreviation":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","language":"en","page":"512-515","source":"SAGE Journals","title":"Likes Attract: The Sociopolitical Groupthink of (Social) Psychologists","title-short":"Likes Attract","volume":"7","author":[{"family":"Redding","given":"Richard E."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2012",9,1]]}}}],"schema":""} (Redding, 2012). It follows, then, that the social sciences may be stuck in a self-perpetuating trap whereby political bias driven by ideological homogeneity has created an obstacle to non-liberal students becoming a part of the field. This process may create further ideological homogeneity in a self-exacerbating cycle.Discrimination. Furthermore, when a field becomes politically homogeneous, the norms may shift such that it may even become normalized to express hostility towards one’s ideological opponents (Prentice, 2012). These norms can emerge because “everyone” (in one’s ideologically homogeneous circles) “knows” how despicable the other side is (for a report on asymmetrical mockery of Republicans and conservatives at a conference of the Association for Psychological Science, see ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"WkxlGSDg","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Mather, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Mather, 2018)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2190,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2190,"type":"post-weblog","abstract":"A conservative’s recent experiences.","container-title":"Psychology Today","language":"en-US","title":"Continued Political Bias in Social Psychology","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Mather","given":"Robert"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",5,31]]}}}],"schema":""} Mather, 2018).?How might this process diminish the pipeline of non-leftist students in social science? It could do so if these biases manifest in classrooms. Three recent large sample surveys of university students suggest that such biases may indeed manifest in college classrooms. Conservative students reported greater experiences of hostility from instructors than did their non-liberal peers; furthermore, even liberal students agreed that conservative and religious students are the disproportionate recipients of hostility from university faculty ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"h63fWVKI","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Honeycutt et al., 2019; Wills, Brewster, & Nowak, 2019)","plainCitation":"(Honeycutt et al., 2019; Wills, Brewster, & Nowak, 2019)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1929,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1929,"type":"manuscript","event-place":"Working paper","publisher-place":"Working paper","title":"University students’ perceptions of the classroom political climate","author":[{"family":"Honeycutt","given":"Nathan"},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Freberg","given":"Laura"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}},{"id":2082,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2082,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"A political mismatch between professors and a large swath of the student population has been widely documented. This mismatch is salient within sociology, where left-leaning politics are mainstream and institutionalized. Further, extant research indicates that this political mismatch leads students outside of the left-leaning mainstream to perceive that their professors are politically biased and to have diminished classroom experiences. However, studies assessing the influence of students’ religiosity, a foundational element of conservatism, on perceptions of political bias and negative classroom experiences is lacking. In response, this study analyzes survey data from a diverse sample of undergraduate students enrolled in sociology courses to explore the connection between students’ religiosity and perceptions of and subsequent reactions to professors’ political bias. Our results suggest that religiosity affects perceptions of and reactions to professors’ biases through increased skepticism towards science and perceived ideological distance from professors. This process is found to be operant only among politically conservative and moderate students. The implications of our results for sociology are discussed.","container-title":"The American Sociologist","DOI":"10.1007/s12108-018-9388-y","ISSN":"1936-4784","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Am Soc","language":"en","page":"136-153","source":"Springer Link","title":"Students’ Religiosity and Perceptions of Professor Bias: Some Empirical Lessons for Sociologists","title-short":"Students’ Religiosity and Perceptions of Professor Bias","volume":"50","author":[{"family":"Wills","given":"Jeremiah B."},{"family":"Brewster","given":"Zachary W."},{"family":"Nowak","given":"Gerald Roman"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019",3,1]]}}}],"schema":""} (Honeycutt et al., 2019; Wills, Brewster, & Nowak, 2019). Thus, conservative students’ perceptions of hostility do not reflect something unique about conservative students; instead, that students across the political spectrum perceive this hostility, regardless of their own political positions, strongly suggests this reflects an actual classroom dynamic. It should not be surprising, therefore, that conservative students generally try to hide their political beliefs from their professors ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"nYZKa3S5","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Honeycutt et al., 2019)","plainCitation":"(Honeycutt et al., 2019)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1929,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1929,"type":"manuscript","event-place":"Working paper","publisher-place":"Working paper","title":"University students’ perceptions of the classroom political climate","author":[{"family":"Honeycutt","given":"Nathan"},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Freberg","given":"Laura"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Honeycutt et al., 2019). Students may view their conservatism as a stigmatized identity requiring concealment ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"20qYMH8m","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Crocker, Major, & Steele, 1998; Quinn & Chaudoir, 2009)","plainCitation":"(Crocker, Major, & Steele, 1998; Quinn & Chaudoir, 2009)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":890,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":890,"type":"chapter","container-title":"Handbook of social psychology","page":"504–553","publisher":"McGraw-Hill","title":"Social stigma","volume":"2","author":[{"family":"Crocker","given":"Jennifer"},{"family":"Major","given":"Brenda"},{"family":"Steele","given":"Claude M."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1998"]]}}},{"id":939,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":939,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Journal of personality and social psychology","issue":"4","page":"634","title":"Living with a concealable stigmatized identity: the impact of anticipated stigma, centrality, salience, and cultural stigma on psychological distress and health.","volume":"97","author":[{"family":"Quinn","given":"Diane M"},{"family":"Chaudoir","given":"Stephenie R"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2009"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Crocker, Major, & Steele, 1998; Quinn & Chaudoir, 2009). The last thing most of these students are likely to do is pursue a career in a field in which they believe they are unwelcome ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"pxjxLYlr","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Woessner & Kelly-Woessner, 2009)","plainCitation":"(Woessner & Kelly-Woessner, 2009)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":986,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":986,"type":"chapter","container-title":"The politically correct university: Problems, scope, and reforms","event-place":"Washington, DC","note":"Next","page":"38-59","publisher":"AEI Press","publisher-place":"Washington, DC","title":"Left pipeline: Why conservatives don't get doctorates","editor":[{"family":"Maranto","given":"Robert"},{"family":"Redding","given":"Richard E"},{"family":"Hess","given":"Frederick"}],"author":[{"family":"Woessner","given":"Matthew"},{"family":"Kelly-Woessner","given":"April"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2009"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Woessner & Kelly-Woessner, 2009). Such a process may look like conservative students self-select out of social science research, but some may do so to avoid what they perceive as a hostile environment.Student self-reported experiences and perceptions of political bias mirror experiences of university faculty (which were reviewed by Clark and Winegard). We summarize additional studies here that were not included in their review as further evidence supporting their perspective. A replication and extension of ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"uqsEdNRH","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Inbar & Lammers, 2012)","plainCitation":"(Inbar & Lammers, 2012)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":47,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":47,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","issue":"5","page":"496–503","title":"Political diversity in social and personality psychology","volume":"7","author":[{"family":"Inbar","given":"Yoel"},{"family":"Lammers","given":"Joris"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2012"]]}}}],"schema":""} Inbar and Lammers (2012) found that willingness to discriminate against one’s ideological opponents (which they found among social psychologists) extended to academics across the disciplines ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"1KxQ2V40","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Honeycutt & Freberg, 2017)","plainCitation":"(Honeycutt & Freberg, 2017)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":963,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":963,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Inbar and Lammers asked members of APA Division 8 (personality and social psychology) about their political orientation, hostility experienced related to their political orientation, and their willingness to discriminate against others based on perceived political orientation. In this replication and extension, 618 faculty members from various academic disciplines across four California State University campuses completed an online questionnaire that added parallel questions about the liberal experience to the original questions about the conservative experience. Participants were overwhelmingly liberal in self-report across all academic areas except agriculture. The conservative minority reported experiencing more hostility than the liberal majority, but both groups expressed similar “in-group/out-group” attitudes. Results supported the ideological-conflict hypothesis for discrimination and a “birds of a feather flock together” interpretation of the lack of political diversity among the professoriate.","container-title":"Social Psychological and Personality Science","DOI":"10.1177/1948550616667617","ISSN":"1948-5506","issue":"2","journalAbbreviation":"Social Psychological and Personality Science","language":"en","page":"115-123","source":"SAGE Journals","title":"The liberal and conservative experience across academic disciplines: An extension of Inbar and Lammers","title-short":"The Liberal and Conservative Experience Across Academic Disciplines","volume":"8","author":[{"family":"Honeycutt","given":"Nathan"},{"family":"Freberg","given":"Laura"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017",3,1]]}}}],"schema":""} (Honeycutt & Freberg, 2017).Conservative faculty also reported experiencing more hostility from colleagues because of their political beliefs than did liberal and moderate faculty ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"1KxQ2V40","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Honeycutt & Freberg, 2017)","plainCitation":"(Honeycutt & Freberg, 2017)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":963,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":963,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Inbar and Lammers asked members of APA Division 8 (personality and social psychology) about their political orientation, hostility experienced related to their political orientation, and their willingness to discriminate against others based on perceived political orientation. In this replication and extension, 618 faculty members from various academic disciplines across four California State University campuses completed an online questionnaire that added parallel questions about the liberal experience to the original questions about the conservative experience. Participants were overwhelmingly liberal in self-report across all academic areas except agriculture. The conservative minority reported experiencing more hostility than the liberal majority, but both groups expressed similar “in-group/out-group” attitudes. Results supported the ideological-conflict hypothesis for discrimination and a “birds of a feather flock together” interpretation of the lack of political diversity among the professoriate.","container-title":"Social Psychological and Personality Science","DOI":"10.1177/1948550616667617","ISSN":"1948-5506","issue":"2","journalAbbreviation":"Social Psychological and Personality Science","language":"en","page":"115-123","source":"SAGE Journals","title":"The liberal and conservative experience across academic disciplines: An extension of Inbar and Lammers","title-short":"The Liberal and Conservative Experience Across Academic Disciplines","volume":"8","author":[{"family":"Honeycutt","given":"Nathan"},{"family":"Freberg","given":"Laura"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017",3,1]]}}}],"schema":""} (Honeycutt & Freberg, 2017). These same patterns have also been found among an international sample of academic philosophers ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"KuTtLrDj","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Peters, Honeycutt, Block, & Jussim, in press)","plainCitation":"(Peters, Honeycutt, Block, & Jussim, in press)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2094,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2094,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Philosophical Psychology","source":"PhilPapers","title":"Ideological Diversity, Hostility, and Discrimination in Philosophy","author":[{"family":"Peters","given":"Uwe"},{"family":"Honeycutt","given":"Nate"},{"family":"Block","given":"Andreas De"},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}}],"schema":""} (Peters, Honeycutt, Block, & Jussim, in press). Additionally, 50% of conservative SPSP members reported that they had experienced an incident of subtle exclusion, compared to 14.2% of liberal members ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"KLf4Nc0I","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(SPSP Diversity and Climate Committee, 2019)","plainCitation":"(SPSP Diversity and Climate Committee, 2019)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2092,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2092,"type":"report","title":"SPSP diversity and climate survey","URL":"","author":[{"literal":"SPSP Diversity and Climate Committee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019",1]]}}}],"schema":""} (SPSP Diversity and Climate Committee, 2019). For comparison purposes, reported experiences of subtle exclusion for racial/ethnic minority and white members of SPSP were 24.9% and 12.4%, respectively. For heterosexual and sexual minority members, reported experiences of subtle exclusion were 13.8% and 20.1%, respectively. The SPSP report also concluded that conservatives felt “their social identities were less valued than either liberals or participants who reported being neither liberal nor conservative” (p. 63).? Although the sample size for conservatives was small (and, therefore, should be interpreted with caution), the pattern of responses across items all point in the same direction and data from a wide variety of studies strongly suggests that conservatives experience more hostility in academia than do liberals.Questions AskedDo political biases influence the questions researchers can and do ask? According to one recent review, both theory and empirical evidence indicate that cognitive, motivational, and social factors can and do influence the questions researchers ask in ways that are vulnerable to political biases (Jussim, Stevens, & Honeycutt, 2018). For example, political homogeneity may lead to premature scientific foreclosure—the erroneous belief that science has settled some question, thereby discouraging further work on the topic that might reveal the error.?For example, social psychology prematurely foreclosed on conclusions emphasizing the power of self-fulfilling prophecies (Jussim, 2012), the greater susceptibility to bias among conservatives than liberals (Ditto et al., 2018), the existence of higher levels of prejudice among conservatives than liberals (Brandt, Reyna, Chambers, Crawford, & Wetherell, 2014), and the power and pervasiveness of “unconscious prejudice” (Jussim, Careem, Goldberg, Honeycutt, & Stevens, in press). In each case, a ‘consensus’ in support of the erroneous perspective could be found in the scientific literature that lasted decades. Each of these premature foreclosures involved conclusions flattering to liberals or validating equalitarian narratives.Similarly, motivated reasoning (Kunda, 1990) may lead researchers to be more critical and skeptical of findings that challenge their preconceived notions than those that support them (Nickerson, 1998).?Politics may influence scientists’ preconceptions, for example, about the rationality of conservatives or liberals, or the extent and power of bias and discrimination. If so, perhaps, research confirming those notions would be more likely to be published in prestigious journals and highly cited; research disconfirming those notions might have difficulty getting published in prestigious journals, or even getting published at all (as discussed? in Clark and Winegard’s review).Scientists are also heavily influenced by all sorts of social norms (Jussim, Krosnick, Stevens, & Anglin, in press). Norms can influence what is acceptable, popular, or stigmatized to study (Jussim et al., 2018). When deciding what to study, if one is interested in managing one’s career as an academic, topics seen as likely to be warmly received may be pursued far more aggressively than those seen as likely to be harshly received by one’s colleagues. If one understands that most of one’s colleagues are politically left, it will be far easier to manage and advance one’s career if one works on topics appealing to those on the left than on topics that might produce findings that the left opposes (for a brief discussion, see Everett, 2015).As Tetlock and Mitchell (2015) state:?It is not the personal political values of researchers that matter, so much as the willingness of researchers to challenge orthodox ideas within a field, but if the costs of dissent outweigh the benefits of dissent then scientific competition can never drive out spurious results produced by political bias rather than by true empirical causes and effects (Tetlock & Mitchell, 2015, p. 32).In addition to what questions get asked, political values can become embedded in how researchers ask questions (see Reyna, 2018, for a review). This issue was on full display at the 2019 SPSP Political Psychology Pre-Conference. One of the sessions addressed the question of ideological symmetry versus asymmetry. Researchers from two camps were invited to debate whether conservatives and liberals are biased in similar ways (symmetry), or whether conservatives are more biased than liberals (asymmetry). The debate certainly reflected progress, given that for decades the field had prematurely foreclosed on the conclusion that conservatives were more biased than liberals (e.g., Brandt, Reyna, Chambers, Crawford, & Wetherell, 2014; Ditto et al., 2018). However, and here is an informal test of readers’ own political biases: Do you see anything missing? (Take a minute before reading on…). We do. There was?a possibility that was not even considered: Are people on the left more biased than those on the right? Given the awful history of leftwing atrocities (Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Eastern Europe under Communism, North Korea, et cetera), many of which were enabled by all sorts of biases in reasoning and toxic social norms (Solzhenitsyn, 1973), the failure to even raise this question for consideration was a clear blind spot.MeasurementPolitical agendas can intentionally or unintentionally infiltrate themselves into the very measurement of key constructs in politicized areas. Although some manifestations of measurement bias might be subtle, others are more obvious. For example, liberals typically score higher on the “openness to experience” dimension of the five-factor model of personality. One of the items is “I believe that we should look to our religious authorities for decisions on moral issues” (Agree: Openness score goes down). Conservatives are more religious than liberals (Hirsh, Walberg, & Peterson, 2013; Pew Research Center, 2018), and many academics are hostile to religion (Marsden, 2015; Yancey, Reimer, & O’Connell, 2015). Therefore, a failure to recognize that an item tapping religion could spuriously inflate the correlation between the measure of openness and ideology embeds political bias into the measure (Charney, 2015).?In the most sweeping review of these issues to date, Reyna (2018) conducted a systematic march through a myriad of ways, with examples, of how political biases undermine measurement. She reviewed some of the material we just covered, but through a measurement lens. For example, if we do not measure prejudice held by minority groups towards majority groups, we will develop a skewed view of prejudice as primarily, or even exclusively, the province of majority groups.?Reyna (2018) also addressed the problem of “proxy questions,” which refers to use of questions intended to capture Phenomenon A by measuring Phenomenon B, on the grounds that B is supposed to be correlated with A. Issues related to social desirability have encouraged the rise of proxy measures in social science research; participants might not be willing to admit if they are racist or sexist, so indirect measures are needed to get around this. Symbolic racism (Sears, 1988), for example, was created to get around social desirability in the assessment of racism. Critics, however, have identified a slew of reasons that this indirect measure of racism was actually, at least in part, a measure of political conservatism and belief in meritocracy (Tetlock & Mitchell, 1993). The tangling of conservative and racial concepts in a measure intended to indirectly assess racism makes it impossible to assess the independent and interactive effects of either construct (Tetlock, 1994). If, in turn, canonical conclusions regarding prejudice become rooted in the use of indirect measures that are infused with political bias, our understanding of both prejudice and ideology may become deeply flawed (Reyna, 2018).??Reyna (2018) reviewed a wide variety of common proxy measures (system justification, symbolic racism, and the implicit association test [IAT]) and concluded that all implicitly import potentially unjustified ideological assumptions.?Although a full discussion of how ideological assumptions infiltrate these and other measures is beyond the scope of this paper, it is worth noting that measurement issues have been addressed in a substantial and growing literature on political biases (Chambers & Schlenker, 2015; Duarte et al., 2015; Jussim, Crawford, Anglin, Stevens, & Duarte, 2016; Jussim, Crawford, Anglin, & Stevens, 2015; Martin, 2016; Redding, 2001; Reyna, 2018; Tetlock, 1994).?It is possible that efforts to raise awareness about biases have begun to bear fruit in the sense of researchers becoming more sensitive to their own potential for such biases, and, therefore, being better-positioned to reduce or eliminate them. Nearly two decades after introducing items for an actively open-minded thinking scale (AOT), Stanovich and Toplak (2019) discovered they had inadvertently introduced bias against religious individuals into their measure through items asking participants about “beliefs.” It was assumed by Stanovich and his colleagues that participants all interpreted “belief” in the same way, but they came to recognize that “…our own political/worldview conceptions leaked into these items in subtle ways” (p. 163). Specifically, they presumed “beliefs” referred to secular, empirically verifiable understandings of the world.?For secular academic intellectuals, this presumption is understandable. However, when they discovered unexpectedly high negative correlations of religiousness with some variations of the AOT scale, they revisited the items, and reanalyzed some existing data.? Those analyses were consistent with a conclusion that religious respondents interpreted “beliefs” as “spiritual beliefs.” As a result, this led religious people to appear far less open-minded with respect to secular beliefs (which was the focus of the AOT) than they actually were.?“Are we ideologues masquerading as scientists: Have we rigged the research dice in favor of our political agenda?” (Tetlock, 1994, p. 528). For measurement, this is an important question to keep in mind. Being vigilant in the choice and construction of methods used, in addition to ensuring the validity of measures, would assist in mitigating the effect of political bias on measurement. As summarized by Reyna (2018), researchers must ensure their questions are not one-sided, that political assumptions are not embedded to the detriment of construct and face validity, and reviewers and consumers must carefully scrutinize measures to ensure that they assess what they are purported to assess (see also Flake & Fried, 2019, for a review of questionable measurement practices).?InterpretationResearchers can and do misinterpret findings for many reasons. These include misunderstanding of statistics, a desire for “wow! effects” (compelling narratives) to enhance their fame and prestige, failure to consider alternative explanations, and more ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"x5Mb1pMm","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim, Crawford, Anglin, et al., 2016)","plainCitation":"(Jussim, Crawford, Anglin, et al., 2016)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2159,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2159,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"We consider how valid conclusions often lay hidden within research reports, masked by plausible but unjustified conclusions reached in those reports. We employ several well-known and cross-cutting examples from the psychological literature to illustrate how, independent (or in the absence) of replicability difficulties or questionable research practices leading to false positives, motivated reasoning and confirmation biases can lead to drawing unjustified conclusions. In describing these examples, we review strategies and methods by which researchers can identify such practices in their own and others' research reports. These strategies and methods can unmask hidden phenomena that may conflict with researchers' preferred narratives, in order to ultimately produce more sound and valid scientific conclusions. We conclude with general recommendations for how social psychologists can limit the influence of interpretive biases in their own and others' research, and thereby elevate the scientific status and validity of social psychology.","collection-title":"Rigorous and Replicable Methods in Social Psychology","container-title":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.003","ISSN":"0022-1031","journalAbbreviation":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","language":"en","page":"116-133","source":"ScienceDirect","title":"Interpretations and methods: Towards a more effectively self-correcting social psychology","title-short":"Interpretations and methods","volume":"66","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie M."},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean T."},{"family":"Duarte","given":"Jose L."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016",9,1]]}}}],"schema":""} (Jussim, Crawford, Anglin, et al., 2016). Because there are few, if any, strict rules or guidelines governing how to interpret findings, interpretations constitute fertile ground for the manifestation of political biases (for theoretical reviews of how such biases can and do manifest in scientific interpretation, see ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"xOnRgQEc","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim et al., 2015, 2018; Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, Anglin, & Duarte, 2016; Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, & Anglin, 2016)","plainCitation":"(Jussim et al., 2015, 2018; Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, Anglin, & Duarte, 2016; Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, & Anglin, 2016)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":322,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":322,"type":"chapter","container-title":"Sydney Symposium on Social Psychology and Politics.","event-place":"New York, NY","page":"91-109","publisher":"Taylor & Francis","publisher-place":"New York, NY","title":"Ideological bias in social psychological research.","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie"},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean"}],"editor":[{"family":"Forgas","given":"J"},{"family":"Fiedler","given":"K"},{"family":"Crano","given":"W"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015"]]}}},{"id":2106,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2106,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Archives of Scientific Psychology","DOI":"","issue":"1","page":"214-229","title":"Unasked questions about stereotype accuracy.","volume":"6","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean T"},{"family":"Honeycutt","given":"Nathan"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}},{"id":341,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":341,"type":"chapter","container-title":"The Sydney Symposium on the Social Psychology of Morality","event-place":"New York","publisher":"Taylor & Francis","publisher-place":"New York","title":"Do high moral purposes undermine scientific integrity?","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean"},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie"},{"family":"Duarte","given":"Jose L."}],"editor":[{"family":"Forgas","given":"Joseph P."},{"family":"Van Lange","given":""},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016"]]}}},{"id":2198,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2198,"type":"chapter","container-title":"Claremont Symposium on Social Psychology and Politics.","title":"The politics of social psychological science: Distortions in the social psychology of intergroup relations","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Crawford","given":"J. T."},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean T"},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie"}],"editor":[{"family":"Valdesolo","given":"P."},{"family":"Graham","given":"Jesse"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016"]]}}}],"schema":""} Jussim et al., 2015, 2018; Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, Anglin, & Duarte, 2016; Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, & Anglin, 2016). One simplistic way in which politically biased interpretations can manifest is by framing differences between liberals and conservatives in a manner that stigmatizes conservatives when those same differences could just as readily be described neutrally or as reflecting poorly on liberals. Here we augment the cases reviewed by Clark & Winegard with additional evidence. In scientific abstracts for social psychology research, for example, conservatives and conservative ideas are described more negatively than liberals and liberal ideas ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"iZBs5b4U","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Eitan et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Eitan et al., 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1590,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1590,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"The present investigation provides the first systematic empirical tests for the role of politics in academic research. In a large sample of scientific abstracts from the field of social psychology, we find both evaluative differences, such that conservatives are described more negatively than liberals, and explanatory differences, such that conservatism is more likely to be the focus of explanation than liberalism. In light of the ongoing debate about politicized science, a forecasting survey permitted scientists to state a priori empirical predictions about the results, and then change their beliefs in light of the evidence. Participating scientists accurately predicted the direction of both the evaluative and explanatory differences, but at the same time significantly overestimated both effect sizes. Scientists also updated their broader beliefs about political bias in response to the empirical results, providing a model for addressing divisive scientific controversies across fields.","container-title":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1016/j.jesp.2018.06.004","ISSN":"0022-1031","journalAbbreviation":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","page":"188-199","source":"ScienceDirect","title":"Is research in social psychology politically biased? Systematic empirical tests and a forecasting survey to address the controversy","title-short":"Is research in social psychology politically biased?","volume":"79","author":[{"family":"Eitan","given":"Orly"},{"family":"Viganola","given":"Domenico"},{"family":"Inbar","given":"Yoel"},{"family":"Dreber","given":"Anna"},{"family":"Johannesson","given":"Magnus"},{"family":"Pfeiffer","given":"Thomas"},{"family":"Thau","given":"Stefan"},{"family":"Uhlmann","given":"Eric Luis"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",11,1]]}}}],"schema":""} (Eitan et al., 2018). Although such a pattern by itself may or may not reflect bias, other work more clearly identifies how political biases manifest as framing findings in ways that derogate conservatives. For example, ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"jXMzPaBR","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Lilienfeld, 2015)","plainCitation":"(Lilienfeld, 2015)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2138,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2138,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"I extend the arguments of Duarte et al. by examining the implications of political uniformity for the framing of findings in personality and clinical psychology. I argue that the one-sided framing of psychological research on political ideology has limited our understanding of the personality correlates of liberalism and conservatism.","container-title":"Behavioral and Brain Sciences; New York","DOI":"","ISSN":"0140525X","language":"English","page":"n/a","source":"ProQuest","title":"Lack of political diversity and the framing of findings in personality and clinical psychology","volume":"38","author":[{"family":"Lilienfeld","given":"Scott O."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015"]]}}}],"schema":""} Lilienfeld (2015) pointed out that the robust finding that conservatives are more sensitive to threat than are liberals has been framed as “negativity bias” or “motivated closed-mindedness” (they could just as readily been framed as liberal “positivity bias” or “motivated blindness to danger”). Indeed, even the widespread derogatory characterization of conservatives as “rigid” is primarily based on research that has not actually demonstrated rigidity, if rigidity means an inability or unwillingness to change one’s thinking. Instead, what has generally been demonstrated is some level of mean difference between liberals and conservatives on scales measuring constructs such as dogmatism and cognitive flexibility ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"6cqpozwS","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jost, Glasser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003)","plainCitation":"(Jost, Glasser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1219,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1219,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Psychological Bulletin","page":"339-375","title":"Political conservatism as motivated social cognition","volume":"129","author":[{"family":"Jost","given":"J.T."},{"family":"Glasser","given":"J."},{"family":"Kruglanski","given":"A.W."},{"family":"Sulloway","given":"F.J."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2003"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Jost, Glasser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003). Putting aside the possibility that infiltration of political biases in the measurement of dogmatism and rigidity ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"kAhHnThS","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Malka, Lelkes, & Holzer, 2018; Reyna, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Malka, Lelkes, & Holzer, 2018; Reyna, 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2301,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2301,"type":"chapter","container-title":"The Politics of Social Psychology","event-place":"New York, NY","page":"126-146","publisher":"Psychology Press","publisher-place":"New York, NY","title":"Rethinking the rigidity of the right model: Three suboptimal methodological practices and their implications","author":[{"family":"Malka","given":"A"},{"family":"Lelkes","given":"Y"},{"family":"Holzer","given":"N"}],"editor":[{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}},{"id":2132,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2132,"type":"chapter","container-title":"Politics of Social Psychology","event-place":"New York, NY","page":"81-98","publisher":"Psychology Press","publisher-place":"New York, NY","title":"Scale creation, use, and misuse: How politics undermines measurement","author":[{"family":"Reyna","given":"Christine"}],"editor":[{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Malka, Lelkes, & Holzer, 2018; Reyna, 2018) may exaggerate differences between liberals and conservatives on these measures, how much flexibility is the “right” amount? Should people be entirely ‘wishy-washy’ (a mirror image pejorative characterization of liberals’ lower “dogmatism” and greater “flexibility”), jettisoning their beliefs at the slightest challenge? There currently are no answers to questions like this; value laden characterizations of conservatives as “dogmatic” and liberals as “open-minded” are scientifically meaningless absent operationalizations of dogmatism and open-mindedness that mean anything beyond ‘scores on a scale.’Political bias can also influence the interpretation of findings through the exaggeration of differences between conservatives and liberals in ways that flatter liberals. Such is the case when researchers commit the high-low fallacy ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"MW0dYlt5","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Reyna, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Reyna, 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2132,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2132,"type":"chapter","container-title":"Politics of Social Psychology","event-place":"New York, NY","page":"81-98","publisher":"Psychology Press","publisher-place":"New York, NY","title":"Scale creation, use, and misuse: How politics undermines measurement","author":[{"family":"Reyna","given":"Christine"}],"editor":[{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Reyna, 2018). Often, researchers fall victim to interpreting small differences at one end of the scale as if the differences reflect values at the scale endpoints. For example, even though relatively few people score on the low end (below the scale midpoint) of the rightwing authoritarianism scale (RWA), psychologists routinely refer to conservatives as high and liberals as low in authoritarianism ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"j0oFBTJC","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Reyna, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Reyna, 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2132,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2132,"type":"chapter","container-title":"Politics of Social Psychology","event-place":"New York, NY","page":"81-98","publisher":"Psychology Press","publisher-place":"New York, NY","title":"Scale creation, use, and misuse: How politics undermines measurement","author":[{"family":"Reyna","given":"Christine"}],"editor":[{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Reyna, 2018). Statistically significant differences do not indicate that groups are at opposite ends of the scale ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"sO79w7nJ","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Reyna, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Reyna, 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2132,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2132,"type":"chapter","container-title":"Politics of Social Psychology","event-place":"New York, NY","page":"81-98","publisher":"Psychology Press","publisher-place":"New York, NY","title":"Scale creation, use, and misuse: How politics undermines measurement","author":[{"family":"Reyna","given":"Christine"}],"editor":[{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Reyna, 2018). Instead, more valid interpretations would be that liberals score low on RWA whereas conservatives’ scores are more intermediate.?Of course, this problem is itself confounded with the measurement problem—is anyone shocked that conservatives score higher than liberals on a rightwing authoritarianism scale, whereas liberals score higher than conservatives, on a leftwing authoritarianism scale ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"lKdGw4m3","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Conway, Houck, Gornick, & Repke, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Conway, Houck, Gornick, & Repke, 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2199,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2199,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Although past research suggests authoritarianism may be a uniquely right-wing phenomenon, the present two studies tested the hypothesis that authoritarianism exists in both right-wing and left-wing contexts in essentially equal degrees. Across two studies, university (n = 475) and Mechanical Turk (n = 298) participants completed either the RWA (right-wing authoritarianism) scale or a newly developed (and parallel) LWA (left-wing authoritarianism) scale. Participants further completed measurements of ideology and three domain-specific scales: prejudice, dogmatism, and attitude strength. Findings from both studies lend support to an authoritarianism symmetry hypothesis: Significant positive correlations emerged between LWA and measurements of liberalism, prejudice, dogmatism, and attitude strength. These results largely paralleled those correlating RWA with identical conservative-focused measurements, and an overall effect-size measurement showed LWA was similarly related to those constructs (compared to RWA) in both Study 1 and Study 2. Taken together, these studies provide evidence that LWA may be a viable construct in ordinary U.S. samples.","container-title":"Political Psychology","DOI":"10.1111/pops.12470","ISSN":"1467-9221","issue":"5","language":"en","page":"1049-1067","source":"Wiley Online Library","title":"Finding the Loch Ness Monster: Left-Wing Authoritarianism in the United States","title-short":"Finding the Loch Ness Monster","volume":"39","author":[{"family":"Conway","given":"Lucian Gideon"},{"family":"Houck","given":"Shannon C."},{"family":"Gornick","given":"Laura Janelle"},{"family":"Repke","given":"Meredith A."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Conway, Houck, Gornick, & Repke, 2018)?Such biases may be particularly powerful when, exactly as argued by Clark and Winegard, they are driven by equalitarian motives.?This may help explain why identical effect sizes (of about r=.11) are viewed as socially important if being socially important means implicit bias can explain social inequalities ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"YUfbK9uv","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Greenwald, Banaji, & Nosek, 2015)","plainCitation":"(Greenwald, Banaji, & Nosek, 2015)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1529,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1529,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Greenwald, Poehlman, Uhlmann, and Banaji (2009; GPUB hereafter) reported an average predictive validity correlation of r .236 for Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures involving Black–White racial attitudes and stereotypes. Oswald, Mitchell, Blanton, Jaccard, and Tetlock (2013; OMBJT) reported a lower aggregate figure for correlations involving IAT measures (r .148). The difference between the estimates of the 2 reviews was due mostly to their use of different policies for including effect sizes. GPUB limited their study to findings that assessed theoretically expected attitude–behavior and stereotype–judgment correlations along with others that the authors expected to show positive correlations. OMBJT included a substantial minority of correlations for which there was no theoretical expectation of a predictive relationship. Regardless of inclusion policy, both meta-analyses estimated aggregate correlational effect sizes that were large enough to explain discriminatory impacts that are societally significant either because they can affect many people simultaneously or because they can repeatedly affect single persons.","container-title":"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology","issue":"4","page":"553-561","title":"Statistically small effects of the Implicit Association Test can have societally large effects.","volume":"108","author":[{"family":"Greenwald","given":"Anthony G"},{"family":"Banaji","given":"Mahzarin R"},{"family":"Nosek","given":"Brian A"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Greenwald, Banaji, & Nosek, 2015), and trivially small if being trivially small means there are no serious differences between men and women ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"utyM5Ija","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Hyde, 2005)","plainCitation":"(Hyde, 2005)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1531,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1531,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"The differences model, which argues that males and fe- males are vastly different psychologically, dominates the popular media. Here, the author advances a very different view, the gender similarities hypothesis, which holds that males and females are similar on most, but not all, psy- chological variables. Results from a review of 46 meta- analyses support the gender similarities hypothesis. Gender differences can vary substantially in magnitude at different ages and depend on the context in which measurement occurs. Overinflated claims of gender differences carry substantial costs in areas such as the workplace and relationships.","container-title":"American Psychologist","issue":"6","page":"581-592","title":"The gender similarities hypothesis","volume":"60","author":[{"family":"Hyde","given":"Janet Shibley"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2005"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Hyde, 2005).?However, as broad generalizations, socially important is mutually exclusive with trivially small. How is it possible, then, that both descriptions exist unchallenged in highly-cited articles appearing in prominent peer reviewed journals, without even acknowledgement of the contradiction, let alone attempts to resolve it? Clark and Winegard provide a likely answer: both articles advance equalitarian narratives, and scientists are motivated to embrace those narratives. Explicitly acknowledging that these two good equalitarian narratives conflict with each other would undercut the ability to advance at least one of them. Accordingly, their perspective predicts that few will notice the contradiction and, even among those that do, even fewer will be motivated to point it out and risk the ire of their colleagues. A similar process may explain unjustified interpretations of the original stereotype threat research ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"txgFtzI7","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(C. M. Steele & Aronson, 1995)","plainCitation":"(C. M. Steele & Aronson, 1995)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2202,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2202,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Stereotype threat is being at risk of confirming, as self-characteristic, a negative stereotype about one's group. Studies 1 and 2 varied the stereotype vulnerability of Black participants taking a difficult verbal test by varying whether or not their performance was ostensibly diagnostic of ability, and thus, whether or not they were at risk of fulfilling the racial stereotype about their intellectual ability. Reflecting the pressure of this vulnerability, Blacks underperformed in relation to Whites in the ability-diagnostic condition but not in the nondiagnostic condition (with Scholastic Aptitude Tests controlled). Study 3 validated that ability-diagnosticity cognitively activated the racial stereotype in these participants and motivated them not to conform to it, or to be judged by it. Study 4 showed that mere salience of the stereotype could impair Blacks' performance even when the test was not ability diagnostic. The role of stereotype vulnerability in the standardized test performance of ability-stigmatized groups is discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)","container-title":"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797","ISSN":"1939-1315(Electronic),0022-3514(Print)","issue":"5","page":"797-811","source":"APA PsycNET","title":"Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans","volume":"69","author":[{"family":"Steele","given":"Claude M."},{"family":"Aronson","given":"Joshua"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1995"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Steele & Aronson, 1995) as demonstrating that ‘but for stereotype threat, black and white test scores would be equal.’ This conclusion validates the equalitarian assumptions that there are no real racial differences other than those produced by discrimination. Unfortunately, however, ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"iFDkacSP","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(C. M. Steele & Aronson, 1995)","plainCitation":"(C. M. Steele & Aronson, 1995)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2202,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2202,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Stereotype threat is being at risk of confirming, as self-characteristic, a negative stereotype about one's group. Studies 1 and 2 varied the stereotype vulnerability of Black participants taking a difficult verbal test by varying whether or not their performance was ostensibly diagnostic of ability, and thus, whether or not they were at risk of fulfilling the racial stereotype about their intellectual ability. Reflecting the pressure of this vulnerability, Blacks underperformed in relation to Whites in the ability-diagnostic condition but not in the nondiagnostic condition (with Scholastic Aptitude Tests controlled). Study 3 validated that ability-diagnosticity cognitively activated the racial stereotype in these participants and motivated them not to conform to it, or to be judged by it. Study 4 showed that mere salience of the stereotype could impair Blacks' performance even when the test was not ability diagnostic. The role of stereotype vulnerability in the standardized test performance of ability-stigmatized groups is discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)","container-title":"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797","ISSN":"1939-1315(Electronic),0022-3514(Print)","issue":"5","page":"797-811","source":"APA PsycNET","title":"Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans","volume":"69","author":[{"family":"Steele","given":"Claude M."},{"family":"Aronson","given":"Joshua"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1995"]]}}}],"schema":""} Steele and Aronson's (1995) findings did not support those conclusions. Specifically, the studies did not even test the hypothesis that ‘but for stereotype threat, black and white test scores would be equal,’ let alone provide data that supported it. Nonetheless, it was interpreted in that manner for many years, and, sometimes, still is ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"EhJpaHpY","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, Anglin, et al., 2016)","plainCitation":"(Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, Anglin, et al., 2016)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":341,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":341,"type":"chapter","container-title":"The Sydney Symposium on the Social Psychology of Morality","event-place":"New York","publisher":"Taylor & Francis","publisher-place":"New York","title":"Do high moral purposes undermine scientific integrity?","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean"},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie"},{"family":"Duarte","given":"Jose L."}],"editor":[{"family":"Forgas","given":"Joseph P."},{"family":"Van Lange","given":""},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016"]]}}}],"schema":""} (see Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, Anglin, et al., 2016, for a review).?Space constraints do not permit a full exposition of misinterpretations that may reflect political bias. Nonetheless, several reviews raise the possibility that, in addition to the cases reviewed here, the problem also characterizes work on environmental attitudes, stereotype accuracy and bias, self-fulfilling prophecies, rightwing authoritarianism, microaggressions, liberal/conservative differences in bias, and more ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"5yagal9F","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim et al., 2015, 2018; Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, Anglin, et al., 2016; Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, & Anglin, 2016; Lilienfeld, 2017; Martin, 2015; Redding, 2001; Reyna, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Jussim et al., 2015, 2018; Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, Anglin, et al., 2016; Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, & Anglin, 2016; Lilienfeld, 2017; Martin, 2015; Redding, 2001; Reyna, 2018)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":322,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":322,"type":"chapter","container-title":"Sydney Symposium on Social Psychology and Politics.","event-place":"New York, NY","page":"91-109","publisher":"Taylor & Francis","publisher-place":"New York, NY","title":"Ideological bias in social psychological research.","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie"},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean"}],"editor":[{"family":"Forgas","given":"J"},{"family":"Fiedler","given":"K"},{"family":"Crano","given":"W"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015"]]}}},{"id":2106,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2106,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Archives of Scientific Psychology","DOI":"","issue":"1","page":"214-229","title":"Unasked questions about stereotype accuracy.","volume":"6","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean T"},{"family":"Honeycutt","given":"Nathan"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}},{"id":341,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":341,"type":"chapter","container-title":"The Sydney Symposium on the Social Psychology of Morality","event-place":"New York","publisher":"Taylor & Francis","publisher-place":"New York","title":"Do high moral purposes undermine scientific integrity?","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean"},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie"},{"family":"Duarte","given":"Jose L."}],"editor":[{"family":"Forgas","given":"Joseph P."},{"family":"Van Lange","given":""},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016"]]}}},{"id":2198,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2198,"type":"chapter","container-title":"Claremont Symposium on Social Psychology and Politics.","title":"The politics of social psychological science: Distortions in the social psychology of intergroup relations","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Crawford","given":"J. T."},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean T"},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie"}],"editor":[{"family":"Valdesolo","given":"P."},{"family":"Graham","given":"Jesse"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016"]]}}},{"id":887,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":887,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"The microaggression concept has recently galvanized public discussion and spread to numerous college campuses and businesses. I argue that the microaggression research program (MRP) rests on five core premises, namely, that microaggressions (1) are operationalized with sufficient clarity and consensus to afford rigorous scientific investigation; (2) are interpreted negatively by most or all minority group members; (3) reflect implicitly prejudicial and implicitly aggressive motives; (4) can be validly assessed using only respondents’ subjective reports; and (5) exert an adverse impact on recipients’ mental health. A review of the literature reveals negligible support for all five suppositions. More broadly, the MRP has been marked by an absence of connectivity to key domains of psychological science, including psychometrics, social cognition, cognitive-behavioral therapy, behavior genetics, and personality, health, and industrial-organizational psychology. Although the MRP has been fruitful in drawing the field’s attention to subtle forms of prejudice, it is far too underdeveloped on the conceptual and methodological fronts to warrant real-world application. I conclude with 18 suggestions for advancing the scientific status of the MRP, recommend abandonment of the term “microaggression,” and call for a moratorium on microaggression training programs and publicly distributed microaggression lists pending research to address the MRP’s scientific limitations.","container-title":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","DOI":"10.1177/1745691616659391","ISSN":"1745-6916","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","language":"en","page":"138-169","source":"SAGE Journals","title":"Microaggressions: Strong claims, inadequate evidence","title-short":"Microaggressions","volume":"12","author":[{"family":"Lilienfeld","given":"Scott O."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017",1,1]]}}},{"id":2030,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2030,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"American sociology has consistently leaned toward the political Left. This ideological skew hinders sociological insight in three ways. First, the scope of research projects is constrained: sociologists are discouraged from touching on taboo topics and ideologically unpalatable facts. Second, the data used in sociological research have been limited. Sociologists neglect data that portray conservatives positively and liberals negatively. Data are also truncated to hide facts that subvert a liberal narrative. Third, the empathic understanding of non-liberal ideologies is inhibited. Sociologists sometimes develop the erroneous belief that they understand alternative ideologies, and they fail to explore non-liberal ways of framing sociological knowledge. Some counterarguments may be raised against these theses, and I address such counterarguments.","container-title":"The American Sociologist","DOI":"10.1007/s12108-015-9263-z","ISSN":"1936-4784","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Am Soc","language":"en","page":"115-130","source":"Springer Link","title":"How Ideology Has Hindered Sociological Insight","volume":"47","author":[{"family":"Martin","given":"Chris C."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015"]]}}},{"id":401,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":401,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"American Psychologist","issue":"3","page":"205-215","title":"Sociopolitical diversity in psychology: The case for pluralism.","volume":"56","author":[{"family":"Redding","given":"Richard E"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2001"]]}}},{"id":2132,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2132,"type":"chapter","container-title":"Politics of Social Psychology","event-place":"New York, NY","page":"81-98","publisher":"Psychology Press","publisher-place":"New York, NY","title":"Scale creation, use, and misuse: How politics undermines measurement","author":[{"family":"Reyna","given":"Christine"}],"editor":[{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":""} (e.g., Jussim et al., 2015, 2018; Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, Anglin, et al., 2016; Jussim, Crawford, Stevens, & Anglin, 2016; Lilienfeld, 2017; Martin, 2015; Redding, 2001; Reyna, 2018).Suppression of Ideas and FindingsPolitical and especially equalitarian biases may operate to suppress certain ideas and findings. One of the definitions of “suppress” found on is “to withhold from disclosure or publication,” and that is the meaning used here. Suppression can come in two forms: self-suppression and attempted suppression by others.?Self-suppression. ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"ZLWQmF0G","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Becker, 1967, p. 239)","plainCitation":"(Becker, 1967, p. 239)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2162,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2162,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Social problems","issue":"3","page":"239–247","title":"Whose side are we on?","volume":"14","author":[{"family":"Becker","given":"Howard S"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1967"]]}},"locator":"239"}],"schema":""} Becker (1967) is plausibly interpreted as implicitly advocating for politically-motivated self-suppression:One can imagine a liberal sociologist who set out to disprove some of the common stereotypes held about a minority group. To his dismay, his investigation reveals that some of the stereotypes are unfortunately true. In the interests of justice and liberalism, he might well be tempted, and might even succumb to the temptation, to suppress those findings ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"AcqzrAhV","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Becker, 1967, p. 239)","plainCitation":"(Becker, 1967, p. 239)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2162,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2162,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Social problems","issue":"3","page":"239–247","title":"Whose side are we on?","volume":"14","author":[{"family":"Becker","given":"Howard S"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1967"]]}},"locator":"239"}],"schema":""} (Becker, 1967, p. 239).If there is any doubt that ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"ci3AM7sv","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Becker, 1967, p. 239)","plainCitation":"(Becker, 1967, p. 239)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2162,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2162,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Social problems","issue":"3","page":"239–247","title":"Whose side are we on?","volume":"14","author":[{"family":"Becker","given":"Howard S"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1967"]]}},"locator":"239"}],"schema":""} Becker (1967) was advocating for political biases, including suppression, his conclusion (p. 247) leaves no doubt: “We take sides as our personal and political commitments dictate…”Self-suppression is notoriously difficult to demonstrate, of course, because if work has been suppressed, it cannot be easily found. An absence of evidence cannot, by itself, be interpreted as suppression. However, we know of at least 17 cases of suppression uncovered that are consistent with Clark and Winegard’s analysis of how the second equalitarian assumption (prejudice and discrimination are ubiquitous) can bias the scientific literature.? ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"nS88Pi7x","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Zigerell, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Zigerell, 2018)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2220,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2220,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"This study reports results from a new analysis of 17 survey experiment studies that permitted assessment of racial discrimination, drawn from the archives of the Time-sharing Experiments for the Social Sciences. For White participants (n=10?435), pooled results did not detect a net discrimination for or against White targets, but, for Black participants (n=2781), pooled results indicated the presence of a small-to-moderate net discrimination in favor of Black targets; inferences were the same for the subset of studies that had a political candidate target and the subset of studies that had a worker or job applicant target. These results have implications for understanding racial discrimination in the United States, and, given that some of the studies have never been fully reported on in a journal or academic book, the results also suggest the need for preregistration to reduce or eliminate publication bias in racial discrimination studies.","container-title":"Research & Politics","DOI":"10.1177/2053168017753862","ISSN":"2053-1680","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Research & Politics","language":"en","page":"2053168017753862","source":"SAGE Journals","title":"Black and White discrimination in the United States: Evidence from an archive of survey experiment studies","title-short":"Black and White discrimination in the United States","volume":"5","author":[{"family":"Zigerell","given":"L.J."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",1,1]]}}}],"schema":""} Zigerell (2018) discovered 17 unpublished experiments on racial bias embedded in nationally representative surveys totaling over 13,000 respondents. These unpublished experiments failed to detect evidence of anti-black bias among white respondents but did detect pro-black bias among black respondents. Although the role of political biases in producing this situation may never be known with certainty, two points are worth highlighting. First, an alternative explanation is that researchers obtained null results, which are notoriously difficult to publish, so they did not bother to try. However, this explanation is, at best, incomplete, inasmuch as statistically significant evidence of anti-white bias among black respondents was found and the studies still were not published. Second, regardless of the reasons for suppression, the mere fact that these findings were suppressed means that the scientific literature was biased in an equalitarian direction (overstating the extent of racial bias by its failure to include these 17 studies finding no bias among whites) until ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"r78Kkir2","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Zigerell, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Zigerell, 2018)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2220,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2220,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"This study reports results from a new analysis of 17 survey experiment studies that permitted assessment of racial discrimination, drawn from the archives of the Time-sharing Experiments for the Social Sciences. For White participants (n=10?435), pooled results did not detect a net discrimination for or against White targets, but, for Black participants (n=2781), pooled results indicated the presence of a small-to-moderate net discrimination in favor of Black targets; inferences were the same for the subset of studies that had a political candidate target and the subset of studies that had a worker or job applicant target. These results have implications for understanding racial discrimination in the United States, and, given that some of the studies have never been fully reported on in a journal or academic book, the results also suggest the need for preregistration to reduce or eliminate publication bias in racial discrimination studies.","container-title":"Research & Politics","DOI":"10.1177/2053168017753862","ISSN":"2053-1680","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Research & Politics","language":"en","page":"2053168017753862","source":"SAGE Journals","title":"Black and White discrimination in the United States: Evidence from an archive of survey experiment studies","title-short":"Black and White discrimination in the United States","volume":"5","author":[{"family":"Zigerell","given":"L.J."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",1,1]]}}}],"schema":""} Zigerell's (2018) forensic work rediscovered these studies. This raises the following unanswerable question: How many other unpublished studies failing to find evidence of demographic biases are there? ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"6qmLe8wG","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Zigerell, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Zigerell, 2018)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2220,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2220,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"This study reports results from a new analysis of 17 survey experiment studies that permitted assessment of racial discrimination, drawn from the archives of the Time-sharing Experiments for the Social Sciences. For White participants (n=10?435), pooled results did not detect a net discrimination for or against White targets, but, for Black participants (n=2781), pooled results indicated the presence of a small-to-moderate net discrimination in favor of Black targets; inferences were the same for the subset of studies that had a political candidate target and the subset of studies that had a worker or job applicant target. These results have implications for understanding racial discrimination in the United States, and, given that some of the studies have never been fully reported on in a journal or academic book, the results also suggest the need for preregistration to reduce or eliminate publication bias in racial discrimination studies.","container-title":"Research & Politics","DOI":"10.1177/2053168017753862","ISSN":"2053-1680","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Research & Politics","language":"en","page":"2053168017753862","source":"SAGE Journals","title":"Black and White discrimination in the United States: Evidence from an archive of survey experiment studies","title-short":"Black and White discrimination in the United States","volume":"5","author":[{"family":"Zigerell","given":"L.J."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",1,1]]}}}],"schema":""} Another example of self-suppression can be found in IAT research. In response to criticism of the ability of IAT studies to account for racial discrimination ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"U5wByJO9","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Blanton et al., 2009)","plainCitation":"(Blanton et al., 2009)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2304,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2304,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Journal of Applied Psychology","issue":"3","page":"567-582","title":"Strong claims and weak evidence: Reassessing the predictive validity of the IAT.","volume":"94","author":[{"family":"Blanton","given":"Hart"},{"family":"Jaccard","given":"James"},{"family":"Klick","given":"Jonathan"},{"family":"Mellers","given":"Barbara"},{"family":"Mitchell","given":"Gregory"},{"family":"Tetlock","given":"Philip E"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2009"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Blanton et al., 2009), a retort emphasized the validity of the IAT and included in its title: “… Executive Summary of Ten Studies that no Manager Should Ignore” ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"qPJkGJcT","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(John T. Jost et al., 2009)","plainCitation":"(John T. Jost et al., 2009)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":604,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":604,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"In this article, we respond at length to recent critiques of research on implicit bias, especially studies using the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Tetlock and Mitchell (2009) claim that “there is no evidence that the IAT reliably predicts class-wide discrimination on tangible outcomes in any setting,” accuse their colleagues of violating “the injunction to separate factual from value judgments,” adhering blindly to a “statist interventionist” ideology, and of conducting a witch-hunt against implicit racists, sexists, and others. These and other charges are specious. Far from making “extraordinary claims” that “require extraordinary evidence,” researchers have identified the existence and consequences of implicit bias through well-established methods based upon principles of cognitive psychology that have been developed in nearly a century's worth of work. We challenge the blanket skepticism and organizational complacency advocated by Tetlock and Mitchell and summarize 10 recent studies that no manager (or managerial researcher) should ignore. These studies reveal that students, nurses, doctors, police officers, employment recruiters, and many others exhibit implicit biases with respect to race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, social status, and other distinctions. Furthermore—and contrary to the emphatic assertions of the critics—participants’ implicit associations do predict socially and organizationally significant behaviors, including employment, medical, and voting decisions made by working adults.","container-title":"Research in Organizational Behavior","DOI":"10.1016/j.riob.2009.10.001","ISSN":"0191-3085","journalAbbreviation":"Research in Organizational Behavior","page":"39-69","source":"ScienceDirect","title":"The existence of implicit bias is beyond reasonable doubt: A refutation of ideological and methodological objections and executive summary of ten studies that no manager should ignore","title-short":"The existence of implicit bias is beyond reasonable doubt","volume":"29","author":[{"family":"Jost","given":"J. T."},{"family":"Rudman","given":"Laurie A."},{"family":"Blair","given":"Irene V."},{"family":"Carney","given":"Dana R."},{"family":"Dasgupta","given":"Nilanjana"},{"family":"Glaser","given":"Jack"},{"family":"Hardin","given":"Curtis D."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2009"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Jost et al., 2009). Putting aside the fact that six of the ten studies did not address racial discrimination, even the four that did found almost no evidence of racial discrimination ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"exBJw0oR","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim et al., in press)","plainCitation":"(Jussim et al., in press)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2213,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2213,"type":"chapter","container-title":"The Future of Research on Implicit Bias","title":"IAT scores, racial gaps, and scientific gaps","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Careem","given":"Akeela"},{"family":"Goldberg","given":"Zach"},{"family":"Honeycutt","given":"Nathan"},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean"}],"editor":[{"family":"Krosnick","given":"Jon A."},{"family":"Stark","given":"T. H."},{"family":"Scott","given":"A.L."}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}}],"schema":""} (see Jussim et al., in press, for a review). This was simply not reported in ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"Oq5AGDpv","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jost et al., 2009)","plainCitation":"(Jost et al., 2009)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":604,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":604,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"In this article, we respond at length to recent critiques of research on implicit bias, especially studies using the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Tetlock and Mitchell (2009) claim that “there is no evidence that the IAT reliably predicts class-wide discrimination on tangible outcomes in any setting,” accuse their colleagues of violating “the injunction to separate factual from value judgments,” adhering blindly to a “statist interventionist” ideology, and of conducting a witch-hunt against implicit racists, sexists, and others. These and other charges are specious. Far from making “extraordinary claims” that “require extraordinary evidence,” researchers have identified the existence and consequences of implicit bias through well-established methods based upon principles of cognitive psychology that have been developed in nearly a century's worth of work. We challenge the blanket skepticism and organizational complacency advocated by Tetlock and Mitchell and summarize 10 recent studies that no manager (or managerial researcher) should ignore. These studies reveal that students, nurses, doctors, police officers, employment recruiters, and many others exhibit implicit biases with respect to race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, social status, and other distinctions. Furthermore—and contrary to the emphatic assertions of the critics—participants’ implicit associations do predict socially and organizationally significant behaviors, including employment, medical, and voting decisions made by working adults.","container-title":"Research in Organizational Behavior","DOI":"10.1016/j.riob.2009.10.001","ISSN":"0191-3085","journalAbbreviation":"Research in Organizational Behavior","page":"39-69","source":"ScienceDirect","title":"The existence of implicit bias is beyond reasonable doubt: A refutation of ideological and methodological objections and executive summary of ten studies that no manager should ignore","title-short":"The existence of implicit bias is beyond reasonable doubt","volume":"29","author":[{"family":"Jost","given":"J. T."},{"family":"Rudman","given":"Laurie A."},{"family":"Blair","given":"Irene V."},{"family":"Carney","given":"Dana R."},{"family":"Dasgupta","given":"Nilanjana"},{"family":"Glaser","given":"Jack"},{"family":"Hardin","given":"Curtis D."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2009"]]}}}],"schema":""} Jost et al.'s (2009) reply, or in any paper we know of that has cited that reply, until we did a deep dive into the 10 studies and discovered the almost complete absence of racial bias effects (Jussim et al, in press).Suppression by others. In addition to self-suppression, sometimes, findings are suppressed by others. Academia is a social enterprise—our publications, grants, invitations, jobs, and promotions hinge heavily on others’ evaluations of us ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"9ud17G1f","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press)","plainCitation":"(Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2217,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2217,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"A crescendo of incidents have raised concerns about whether scientific practices in psychology may be suboptimal, sometimes leading to the publication, dissemination, and application of unreliable or misinterpreted findings. Psychology has been a leader in identifying possibly suboptimal practices and proposing reforms that might enhance the efficiency of the scientific process and the publication of robust evidence and interpretations. To help shape future efforts, this paper offers a model of the psychological and socio-structural forces and processes that may influence scientists’ practices. The model identifies practices targeted by interventions and reforms, and which practices remain unaddressed. The model also suggests directions for empirical research to assess how best to enhance the effectiveness of psychological inquiry.","container-title":"Psychologica Belgica","DOI":"10.5334/pb.496","ISSN":"0033-2879","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Psychol Belg","note":"PMID: 31565236\nPMCID: PMC6743032","page":"353-372","source":"PubMed Central","title":"A Social Psychological Model of Scientific Practices: Explaining Research Practices and Outlining the Potential for Successful Reforms","title-short":"A Social Psychological Model of Scientific Practices","volume":"59","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Krosnick","given":"Jon A."},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean T."},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie M."}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}}],"schema":""} (Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press). If some ideas and those who advocate them are sanctioned and punished, suppression is a likely outcome. This state of affairs was recently explicitly articulated by social psychologist Michael Inzlicht ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"8DI4395j","properties":{"formattedCitation":"({\\i{}WTF is the IDW?}, 2018)","plainCitation":"(WTF is the IDW?, 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2222,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2222,"type":"broadcast","abstract":"Yoel and Mickey take a deep dive into the so-called Intellectual Dark Web (IDW). What is the IDW and who are the prominent members of this group? Why do members of the IDW seem so cranky?","title":"WTF is the IDW?","URL":"","accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",12,9]]},"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",6,20]]}}}],"schema":""} (WTF is the IDW?, 2018):?What if I felt that overemphasis on oppression is a terrible idea, hurts alleged victims of oppression, and is bad for everyone. What if I was outspoken about this? I suspect I would face a lot more opposition, even though not much could happen to my job security, but I’d have a lot of people screaming at me, making my life uncomfortable. And, truly, I wouldn’t do it, because I’d be scared. I wouldn’t do it because I’m a coward.Our view is that Inzlicht’s willingness to go public with this sort of statement means, if anything, he is less of a coward than many others—which is plausibly interpretable as suggesting that the problem extends widely. Indeed, there are more than ample documentable instances where academics have been subject to punishment (investigations, firings, retractions), not because their ideas were refuted or their data found to be fraudulent, but because other academics found their ideas offensive. Most of these cases involved findings or arguments that challenged (or, perhaps, threatened) academics’ equalitarian sensibilities (race, sex, ethnicity, colonialism, et cetera, ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"D1Bk656v","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim, 2018a; Quillette, 2019)","plainCitation":"(Jussim, 2018a; Quillette, 2019)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2224,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2224,"type":"webpage","abstract":"The darkest part is not the rise of radicalism, but the passive acquiescence of the vast majority of faculty and students.","container-title":"Areo","language":"en-US","title":"The Reality of the Rise of an Intolerant and Radical Left on Campus","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",3,17]]}}},{"id":2228,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2228,"type":"webpage","abstract":"Quillette has been unwavering in its support of Noah Carl, a young conservative scholar who was targeted by an outrage mob after getting a research fellowship at St. Edmund’s College, Cambridge. After an “open letter” was circulated by a group of activist academics last December describing Noah’s work as “racist pseudoscience” and calling for an “investigation” into his appointment, we ran an editorial denouncing this witch-hunt. We published supportive comments by Jonathan Haidt, Jeffrey Flier, Cass Sunstein, Tyler Cowan, Jeff McMahan and Peter Singer, and asked people to sign a counter-petition which attracted over 1,400 signatories. Unfortunately, St. Edmund’s College did the bidding of the protestors, launched two separate investigations and last month terminated Noah Carl’s employment. We ran a follow-up piece, this time criticizing St. Edmund’s cowardly decision, and invited professors and lecturers to put their names to a letter of condemnation. That got over 600 signatures, more than the number of academics who signed the original “open letter.” Since then, Noah has received widespread support from a variety of sources. The Spectator has …","container-title":"Quillette","language":"en-AU","title":"Noah Carl: An Update on the Young Scholar Fired by a Cambridge College for Thoughtcrime","title-short":"Noah Carl","URL":"","author":[{"literal":"Quillette"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019",5,28]]}}}],"schema":""} Jussim, 2018a; Quillette, 2019).How many early-career researchers are willing to risk their careers by stepping on intellectual hornets nests??Indeed, given the political climate in the academy, and especially in the social sciences, how many even senior scientists are willing to court the type of hostility feared by Inzlicht? We speculate that Inzlicht’s comments apply widely. If so, the obvious consequence is that suppression of research ideas and findings out of fear of running afoul of one’s colleagues will produce a biased ‘scientific literature’ that provides more support for equalitarian narratives than is actually justified.CitationsPolitical motivations and blinders may also distort scientific literatures by influencing which studies researchers emphasize. This can manifest in many ways, one of which is citations.?Although papers can be cited for many reasons, some are that researchers consider them relevant, valuable, or important. Because Clark and Winegard only scratch the surface of citation biases, we present more such evidence here.?For example, in 2012 and 2015, papers reporting studies assessing gender biases in STEM hiring were published. Table 1 summarizes their key characteristics and citations, and shows the paper finding biases against women has been cited at a vastly higher rate even though by most conventional methodological quality metrics (number of studies, sample size) it was less methodologically sound. This citation pattern shown in Table 1 is not unusual.? ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"ymZEYsN2","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim, 2019b)","plainCitation":"(Jussim, 2019b)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2270,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2270,"type":"post-weblog","abstract":"Studies that find bias against women often get disproportionate attention.","container-title":"Psychology Today","language":"en-US","title":"Scientific Bias in Favor of Studies Finding Gender Bias","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019",6,23]]}}}],"schema":""} Jussim (2019) examined citation patterns of ten papers published in 2015 or earlier on gender bias in peer review (Table 2).?Four found biases favoring men; six found either no bias or biases favoring women. The citation patterns echoed those shown in Table 1; vastly larger-scale studies finding no evidence of biases against women are cited at a fraction of the rate of far smaller studies finding biases against women. This pattern is not restricted to gender issues.?A famous study that primed age stereotypes and found people walk down the hall more slowly has been cited over 5000 times ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"3orwitx0","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Bargh, Chen, & Burrows, 1996)","plainCitation":"(Bargh, Chen, & Burrows, 1996)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2242,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2242,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Previous research has shown that trait concepts and stereotypes become active automatically in the presence of relevant behavior or stereotyped-group features. Through the use of the same priming procedures as in previous impression formation research, Experiment 1 showed that participants whose concept of rudeness was primed interrupted the experimenter more quickly and frequently than did participants primed with polite-related stimuli. In Experiment 2, participants for whom an elderly stereotype was primed walked more slowly down the hallway when leaving the experiment than did control participants, consistent with the content of that stereotype. In Experiment 3, participants for whom the African American stereotype was primed subliminally reacted with more hostility to a vexatious request of the experimenter. Implications of this automatic behavior priming effect for self-fulfilling prophecies are discussed, as is whether social behavior is necessarily mediated by conscious choice processes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)","container-title":"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.230","ISSN":"1939-1315(Electronic),0022-3514(Print)","issue":"2","page":"230-244","source":"APA PsycNET","title":"Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action","title-short":"Automaticity of social behavior","volume":"71","author":[{"family":"Bargh","given":"John A."},{"family":"Chen","given":"Mark"},{"family":"Burrows","given":"Lara"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1996"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Bargh, Chen, & Burrows, 1996); a failed replication ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"nfLeIxzT","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Doyen, Klein, Pichon, & Cleeremans, 2012)","plainCitation":"(Doyen, Klein, Pichon, & Cleeremans, 2012)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2245,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2245,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"The perspective that behavior is often driven by unconscious determinants has become widespread in social psychology. Bargh, Chen, and Burrows' (1996) famous study, in which participants unwittingly exposed to the stereotype of age walked slower when exiting the laboratory, was instrumental in defining this perspective. Here, we present two experiments aimed at replicating the original study. Despite the use of automated timing methods and a larger sample, our first experiment failed to show priming. Our second experiment was aimed at manipulating the beliefs of the experimenters: Half were led to think that participants would walk slower when primed congruently, and the other half was led to expect the opposite. Strikingly, we obtained a walking speed effect, but only when experimenters believed participants would indeed walk slower. This suggests that both priming and experimenters' expectations are instrumental in explaining the walking speed effect. Further, debriefing was suggestive of awareness of the primes. We conclude that unconscious behavioral priming is real, while real, involves mechanisms different from those typically assumed to cause the effect.","container-title":"PLOS ONE","DOI":"10.1371/journal.pone.0029081","ISSN":"1932-6203","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"PLOS ONE","language":"en","page":"e29081","source":"PLoS Journals","title":"Behavioral Priming: It's All in the Mind, but Whose Mind?","title-short":"Behavioral Priming","volume":"7","author":[{"family":"Doyen","given":"Stéphane"},{"family":"Klein","given":"Olivier"},{"family":"Pichon","given":"Cora-Lise"},{"family":"Cleeremans","given":"Axel"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2012",1,18]]}}}],"schema":""} (Doyen, Klein, Pichon, & Cleeremans, 2012), 580 (all citation counts in the present and next paragraphs were obtained on December 10, 2019 from Google Scholar).?Even if we restrict citations to 2013 and later, the counts are 2340 and 548. The first paper finding stereotype threat effects among women in math ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"LYQE5aVS","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Spencer, Steele, & Quinn, 1999)","plainCitation":"(Spencer, Steele, & Quinn, 1999)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2248,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2248,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"When women perform math, unlike men, they risk being judged by the negative stereotype that women have weaker math ability. We call this predicamentstereotype threatand hypothesize that the apprehension it causes may disrupt women's math performance. In Study 1 we demonstrated that the pattern observed in the literature that women underperform on difficult (but not easy) math tests was observed among a highly selected sample of men and women. In Study 2 we demonstrated that this difference in performance could be eliminated when we lowered stereotype threat by describing the test as not producing gender differences. However, when the test was described as producing gender differences and stereotype threat was high, women performed substantially worse than equally qualified men did. A third experiment replicated this finding with a less highly selected population and explored the mediation of the effect. The implication that stereotype threat may underlie gender differences in advanced math performance, even those that have been attributed to genetically rooted sex differences, is discussed.","container-title":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1006/jesp.1998.1373","ISSN":"0022-1031","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","language":"en","page":"4-28","source":"ScienceDirect","title":"Stereotype Threat and Women's Math Performance","volume":"35","author":[{"family":"Spencer","given":"Steven J."},{"family":"Steele","given":"Claude M."},{"family":"Quinn","given":"Diane M."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1999",1,1]]}}}],"schema":""} (Spencer, Steele, & Quinn, 1999) has been cited over 3800 times; a failed replication with a far larger sample size ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"gdeInuUv","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Finnigan & Corker, 2016)","plainCitation":"(Finnigan & Corker, 2016)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2251,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2251,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Stereotype threat is considered to be a robust effect that explains persistent gender gaps in math performance and scientific career trajectories. Some evidence suggests stereotype threat effects are buffered by adoption of performance avoidance goals (Chalabaev, Major, Sarrazin, & Cury, 2012). With 590 American female participants, we closely replicated Chalabaev et al. (2012). Results showed no significant main or interaction effects for stereotype threat or performance avoidance goals, despite multiple controls. We conclude that effects of stereotype threat might be smaller than typically reported and find limited evidence for moderation by avoidance achievement goals. Accordingly, stereotype threat might not be a major part of the explanation for the gender gap in math performance, consistent with recent meta-analyses (Flore & Wicherts, 2015).","container-title":"Journal of Research in Personality","DOI":"10.1016/j.jrp.2016.05.009","ISSN":"0092-6566","journalAbbreviation":"Journal of Research in Personality","language":"en","page":"36-43","source":"ScienceDirect","title":"Do performance avoidance goals moderate the effect of different types of stereotype threat on women’s math performance?","volume":"63","author":[{"family":"Finnigan","given":"Katherine M."},{"family":"Corker","given":"Katherine S."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016",8,1]]}}}],"schema":""} (Finnigan & Corker, 2016), a mere 33. If we restrict citations to 2017 and later, the counts are, respectively, 941 and 30.??Clark and Winegard described the dramatically higher citation count for ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"tjXEPj0x","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Darley & Gross, 1983)","plainCitation":"(Darley & Gross, 1983)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2254,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2254,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Examined the process leading to the confirmation of a perceiver's expectancies about another when the social label that created the expectancy provides poor or tentative evidence about another's true dispositions or capabilities. Ss were 67 undergraduates. One group was led to believe that a child came from a high SES background; the other group, that the child came from a low SES background. Nothing in the SES data conveyed information directly relevant to the child's ability level, and when asked, both groups reluctantly rated the child's ability level to be approximately at grade level. Two other groups received the SES information and then witnessed a videotape of the child taking an academic test. Although the videotaped series was identical for all Ss, those who had information that the child came from a high SES rated her abilities well above grade level, whereas those for whom the child was identified as coming from a lower-class background rated her abilities as below grade level. Both groups cited evidence from the ability test to support their conclusions. Findings are interpreted as suggesting that some \"stereotype\" information creates not certainties but hypotheses about the stereotyped individual. However, these hypotheses are often tested in a biased fashion that leads to their false confirmation. (33 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)","container-title":"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.20","ISSN":"1939-1315(Electronic),0022-3514(Print)","issue":"1","page":"20-33","source":"APA PsycNET","title":"A hypothesis-confirming bias in labeling effects","volume":"44","author":[{"family":"Darley","given":"John M."},{"family":"Gross","given":"Paget H."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1983"]]}}}],"schema":""} Darley and Gross (1983) than for ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"PNm7FfKr","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Baron, Albright, & Malloy, 1995)","plainCitation":"(Baron, Albright, & Malloy, 1995)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2256,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2256,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Social class schemata appear to affect perceivers' judgments of targets under conditions of stimulus ambiguity. In 1990 E. E. Jones noted that there are insufficient data to determine the effect of clearly disconfirming behavioral information and that the limits on social class schema effects are in need of investigation. This was the focus of the present research. Guided descriptively by a Bayesian model of social perception, the authors predicted and found that unambiguous, relevant stimulus information influenced judgments whereas social class information had no effect. Social class information did, however; affect judgments in a no-information condition. This basic result replicated in two experiments among populations that themselves varied in social class composition, thereby demonstrating the generalizability of the findings. Implications of these data for social perception in a stimulus-rich context are discussed.","container-title":"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin","DOI":"10.1177/0146167295214001","ISSN":"0146-1672","issue":"4","journalAbbreviation":"Pers Soc Psychol Bull","language":"en","page":"308-315","source":"SAGE Journals","title":"Effects of Behavioral and Social Class Information on Social Judgment","volume":"21","author":[{"family":"Baron","given":"Reuben M."},{"family":"Albright","given":"Linda"},{"family":"Malloy","given":"Thomas E."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1995",4,1]]}}}],"schema":""} Baron, Albright, and Malloy's (1995) failed replication. These patterns, however, are not restricted to successful studies versus failed replications.? ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"uYJwzgIK","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Darley & Gross, 1983)","plainCitation":"(Darley & Gross, 1983)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2254,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2254,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Examined the process leading to the confirmation of a perceiver's expectancies about another when the social label that created the expectancy provides poor or tentative evidence about another's true dispositions or capabilities. Ss were 67 undergraduates. One group was led to believe that a child came from a high SES background; the other group, that the child came from a low SES background. Nothing in the SES data conveyed information directly relevant to the child's ability level, and when asked, both groups reluctantly rated the child's ability level to be approximately at grade level. Two other groups received the SES information and then witnessed a videotape of the child taking an academic test. Although the videotaped series was identical for all Ss, those who had information that the child came from a high SES rated her abilities well above grade level, whereas those for whom the child was identified as coming from a lower-class background rated her abilities as below grade level. Both groups cited evidence from the ability test to support their conclusions. Findings are interpreted as suggesting that some \"stereotype\" information creates not certainties but hypotheses about the stereotyped individual. However, these hypotheses are often tested in a biased fashion that leads to their false confirmation. (33 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)","container-title":"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.20","ISSN":"1939-1315(Electronic),0022-3514(Print)","issue":"1","page":"20-33","source":"APA PsycNET","title":"A hypothesis-confirming bias in labeling effects","volume":"44","author":[{"family":"Darley","given":"John M."},{"family":"Gross","given":"Paget H."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1983"]]}}}],"schema":""} Darley and Gross (1983) examined whether individuating information reduced stereotype biases (they found it increased bias).?However, the first study framed as addressing exactly that issue was published previously and found that individuating information eliminated stereotype bias ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"tQKMFH4f","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Locksley, Borgida, Brekke, & Hepburn, 1980)","plainCitation":"(Locksley, Borgida, Brekke, & Hepburn, 1980)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2258,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2258,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Tested the assumption that sexual stereotypic beliefs affect the judgments of individuals in an experiment with 98 male and 97 female undergraduates. No evidence was found for effects of stereotypes on Ss' judgments about a target individual. Instead, Ss judgments were strongly influenced by behavioral information about the target. To explain these results, it is noted that the predicted effects of social stereotypes on judgments conform to Bayes' theorem for the normative use of prior probabilities in judgment tasks, inasmuch as stereotypic beliefs may be regarded as intuitive estimates for the probabilities of traits in social groups. Research in the psychology of prediction has demonstrated that people often neglect prior probabilities when making predictions about people, especially when they have individuating information about the person that is subjectively diagnostic of the criterion. An implication of this research is that a minimal amount of subjectively diagnostic target case information should be sufficient to eradicate effects of stereotypes on judgments. Results of a 2nd experiment with 75 female and 55 male undergraduates support this argument. (24 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)","container-title":"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.821","ISSN":"1939-1315(Electronic),0022-3514(Print)","issue":"5","page":"821-831","source":"APA PsycNET","title":"Sex stereotypes and social judgment","volume":"39","author":[{"family":"Locksley","given":"Anne"},{"family":"Borgida","given":"Eugene"},{"family":"Brekke","given":"Nancy"},{"family":"Hepburn","given":"Christine"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1980"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Locksley, Borgida, Brekke, & Hepburn, 1980). ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"b9Jup3JS","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Locksley et al., 1980)","plainCitation":"(Locksley et al., 1980)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2258,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2258,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Tested the assumption that sexual stereotypic beliefs affect the judgments of individuals in an experiment with 98 male and 97 female undergraduates. No evidence was found for effects of stereotypes on Ss' judgments about a target individual. Instead, Ss judgments were strongly influenced by behavioral information about the target. To explain these results, it is noted that the predicted effects of social stereotypes on judgments conform to Bayes' theorem for the normative use of prior probabilities in judgment tasks, inasmuch as stereotypic beliefs may be regarded as intuitive estimates for the probabilities of traits in social groups. Research in the psychology of prediction has demonstrated that people often neglect prior probabilities when making predictions about people, especially when they have individuating information about the person that is subjectively diagnostic of the criterion. An implication of this research is that a minimal amount of subjectively diagnostic target case information should be sufficient to eradicate effects of stereotypes on judgments. Results of a 2nd experiment with 75 female and 55 male undergraduates support this argument. (24 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)","container-title":"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.821","ISSN":"1939-1315(Electronic),0022-3514(Print)","issue":"5","page":"821-831","source":"APA PsycNET","title":"Sex stereotypes and social judgment","volume":"39","author":[{"family":"Locksley","given":"Anne"},{"family":"Borgida","given":"Eugene"},{"family":"Brekke","given":"Nancy"},{"family":"Hepburn","given":"Christine"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1980"]]}}}],"schema":""} Locksley et al. (1980) has been cited 666 times; that is pretty high, but well under half the rate of ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"qvKHVljm","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Darley & Gross, 1983)","plainCitation":"(Darley & Gross, 1983)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2254,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2254,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Examined the process leading to the confirmation of a perceiver's expectancies about another when the social label that created the expectancy provides poor or tentative evidence about another's true dispositions or capabilities. Ss were 67 undergraduates. One group was led to believe that a child came from a high SES background; the other group, that the child came from a low SES background. Nothing in the SES data conveyed information directly relevant to the child's ability level, and when asked, both groups reluctantly rated the child's ability level to be approximately at grade level. Two other groups received the SES information and then witnessed a videotape of the child taking an academic test. Although the videotaped series was identical for all Ss, those who had information that the child came from a high SES rated her abilities well above grade level, whereas those for whom the child was identified as coming from a lower-class background rated her abilities as below grade level. Both groups cited evidence from the ability test to support their conclusions. Findings are interpreted as suggesting that some \"stereotype\" information creates not certainties but hypotheses about the stereotyped individual. However, these hypotheses are often tested in a biased fashion that leads to their false confirmation. (33 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)","container-title":"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.20","ISSN":"1939-1315(Electronic),0022-3514(Print)","issue":"1","page":"20-33","source":"APA PsycNET","title":"A hypothesis-confirming bias in labeling effects","volume":"44","author":[{"family":"Darley","given":"John M."},{"family":"Gross","given":"Paget H."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1983"]]}}}],"schema":""} Darley and Gross's (1983) over 1500 citations, and this is despite the fact that ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"VFfbAp2O","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Locksley et al., 1980)","plainCitation":"(Locksley et al., 1980)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2258,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2258,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Tested the assumption that sexual stereotypic beliefs affect the judgments of individuals in an experiment with 98 male and 97 female undergraduates. No evidence was found for effects of stereotypes on Ss' judgments about a target individual. Instead, Ss judgments were strongly influenced by behavioral information about the target. To explain these results, it is noted that the predicted effects of social stereotypes on judgments conform to Bayes' theorem for the normative use of prior probabilities in judgment tasks, inasmuch as stereotypic beliefs may be regarded as intuitive estimates for the probabilities of traits in social groups. Research in the psychology of prediction has demonstrated that people often neglect prior probabilities when making predictions about people, especially when they have individuating information about the person that is subjectively diagnostic of the criterion. An implication of this research is that a minimal amount of subjectively diagnostic target case information should be sufficient to eradicate effects of stereotypes on judgments. Results of a 2nd experiment with 75 female and 55 male undergraduates support this argument. (24 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)","container-title":"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.821","ISSN":"1939-1315(Electronic),0022-3514(Print)","issue":"5","page":"821-831","source":"APA PsycNET","title":"Sex stereotypes and social judgment","volume":"39","author":[{"family":"Locksley","given":"Anne"},{"family":"Borgida","given":"Eugene"},{"family":"Brekke","given":"Nancy"},{"family":"Hepburn","given":"Christine"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1980"]]}}}],"schema":""} Locksley et al. (1980) reported two studies with a combined total of 325 participants, whereas ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"ypHV1Gm1","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Darley & Gross, 1983)","plainCitation":"(Darley & Gross, 1983)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2254,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2254,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Examined the process leading to the confirmation of a perceiver's expectancies about another when the social label that created the expectancy provides poor or tentative evidence about another's true dispositions or capabilities. Ss were 67 undergraduates. One group was led to believe that a child came from a high SES background; the other group, that the child came from a low SES background. Nothing in the SES data conveyed information directly relevant to the child's ability level, and when asked, both groups reluctantly rated the child's ability level to be approximately at grade level. Two other groups received the SES information and then witnessed a videotape of the child taking an academic test. Although the videotaped series was identical for all Ss, those who had information that the child came from a high SES rated her abilities well above grade level, whereas those for whom the child was identified as coming from a lower-class background rated her abilities as below grade level. Both groups cited evidence from the ability test to support their conclusions. Findings are interpreted as suggesting that some \"stereotype\" information creates not certainties but hypotheses about the stereotyped individual. However, these hypotheses are often tested in a biased fashion that leads to their false confirmation. (33 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)","container-title":"Journal of Personality and Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.20","ISSN":"1939-1315(Electronic),0022-3514(Print)","issue":"1","page":"20-33","source":"APA PsycNET","title":"A hypothesis-confirming bias in labeling effects","volume":"44","author":[{"family":"Darley","given":"John M."},{"family":"Gross","given":"Paget H."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1983"]]}}}],"schema":""} Darley and Gross (1983) only reported a single study with 70 participants. Of course, if it is easy to reduce or eliminate stereotype biases in person perception by providing individuating information, this undercuts equalitarian narratives emphasizing the power of such biases. This, according to Clark and Winegard’s analysis, likely explains some or all of the difference in citations.In this context, it is also interesting to note that ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"8riXofnb","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Kunda & Thagard, 1996)","plainCitation":"(Kunda & Thagard, 1996)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2314,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2314,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Psychological Review","issue":"2","page":"284-308","title":"Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and behaviors: A parallel-constraint-satisfaction theory","volume":"103","author":[{"family":"Kunda","given":"Ziva"},{"family":"Thagard","given":"Paul"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1996"]]}}}],"schema":""} Kunda and Thagard's (1996) review and meta-analysis finding that individuating information effects were “massive” (p. 292) is not cited in a single one of the chapters in the 2010 Handbook of Social Psychology ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"hnqIzHfI","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Fiske, Gilbert, & Lindzey, 2010)","plainCitation":"(Fiske, Gilbert, & Lindzey, 2010)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2316,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2316,"type":"book","edition":"5","event-place":"Hoboken, New Jersey","publisher":"John Wiley & Sons","publisher-place":"Hoboken, New Jersey","title":"Handbook of social psychology","editor":[{"family":"Fiske","given":"Susan T"},{"family":"Gilbert","given":"Daniel T"},{"family":"Lindzey","given":"Gardner"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2010"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Fiske, Gilbert, & Lindzey, 2010). The Handbook is one of the most canonical sources in all of social psychology, and ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"ccKXw1c7","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Kunda & Thagard, 1996)","plainCitation":"(Kunda & Thagard, 1996)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2314,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2314,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Psychological Review","issue":"2","page":"284-308","title":"Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and behaviors: A parallel-constraint-satisfaction theory","volume":"103","author":[{"family":"Kunda","given":"Ziva"},{"family":"Thagard","given":"Paul"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1996"]]}}}],"schema":""} Kunda and Thagard (1996) was itself published in a major outlet (Psychological Review). That it was completely uncited, even though several Handbook chapters focused specifically on stereotypes, social justice, and related concepts, is an omission entirely consistent with the type of equalitarian biases identified by Clark and Winegard. Our last example (though there are many more) are competing meta-analyses of the psychological characteristics of liberals and conservatives. ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"axDQX38N","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(J.T. Jost, Glasser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003)","plainCitation":"(J.T. Jost, Glasser, Kruglanski, & Sulloway, 2003)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1219,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1219,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Psychological Bulletin","page":"339-375","title":"Political conservatism as motivated social cognition","volume":"129","author":[{"family":"Jost","given":"J.T."},{"family":"Glasser","given":"J."},{"family":"Kruglanski","given":"A.W."},{"family":"Sulloway","given":"F.J."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2003"]]}}}],"schema":""} Jost, et al.'s (2003) meta-analysis showing that conservatives were far higher than liberals on dogmatism and rigidity has been cited almost 4000 times; a meta-analysis showing small to nonexistent differences in cognitive styles among conservatives and liberals ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"jCdrWBNp","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Van Hiel, Onraet, & De Pauw, 2010)","plainCitation":"(Van Hiel, Onraet, & De Pauw, 2010)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2260,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2260,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"The present meta-analysis investigates the relationship between social-cultural right-wing attitudes and objective measures of cognitive style on a set of 124 unique samples, with a total of 29,209 participants. Intolerance of ambiguity and cognitive ability yielded relationships of moderate strength with right-wing attitudes, whereas only mixed evidence was obtained for rigidity, complexity, and field dependence. In the discussion, we compare the present weak to moderate relationships with a meta-analysis conducted by Jost, Glaser, Kruglanski, and Sulloway (2003b), included predominantly self-report measures of cognitive style, reporting moderate to strong relationships between conservatism. The need to study cognitive ability as a basis of ideological attitudes is also discussed.","container-title":"Journal of Personality","DOI":"10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00669.x","ISSN":"1467-6494","issue":"6","language":"en","page":"1765-1800","source":"Wiley Online Library","title":"The Relationship Between Social-Cultural Attitudes and Behavioral Measures of Cognitive Style: A Meta-Analytic Integration of Studies","title-short":"The Relationship Between Social-Cultural Attitudes and Behavioral Measures of Cognitive Style","volume":"78","author":[{"family":"Van Hiel","given":"Alain"},{"family":"Onraet","given":"Emma"},{"family":"De Pauw","given":"Sarah"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2010"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Van Hiel, Onraet, & De Pauw, 2010) has been cited 176 times.?If we restrict citations to 2011 and later, the counts are, respectively, 3060 and 173. Admittedly, the Van Hiel et al (2010) was published in a lower-profile journal, and that may partially account for the huge citation difference; however, from another perspective, that it was published in a lower profile journal may itself reflect political biases. More important, many of the examples used here involve comparisons of studies published in the same journal at about the same time, so that the vast citation differences reviewed here cannot generally be explained by differences in the visibility of the publication outlets.The importance of these citation biases goes well beyond providing evidence consistent with Clark and Winegard’s account of scientific equalitarian biases. They are important because they go to the heart of the scientific enterprise, which we discuss in the next section on how ideas and findings enter the scientific canon.CanonizationCanonization ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"KRREqWyy","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press)","plainCitation":"(Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2217,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2217,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"A crescendo of incidents have raised concerns about whether scientific practices in psychology may be suboptimal, sometimes leading to the publication, dissemination, and application of unreliable or misinterpreted findings. Psychology has been a leader in identifying possibly suboptimal practices and proposing reforms that might enhance the efficiency of the scientific process and the publication of robust evidence and interpretations. To help shape future efforts, this paper offers a model of the psychological and socio-structural forces and processes that may influence scientists’ practices. The model identifies practices targeted by interventions and reforms, and which practices remain unaddressed. The model also suggests directions for empirical research to assess how best to enhance the effectiveness of psychological inquiry.","container-title":"Psychologica Belgica","DOI":"10.5334/pb.496","ISSN":"0033-2879","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Psychol Belg","note":"PMID: 31565236\nPMCID: PMC6743032","page":"353-372","source":"PubMed Central","title":"A Social Psychological Model of Scientific Practices: Explaining Research Practices and Outlining the Potential for Successful Reforms","title-short":"A Social Psychological Model of Scientific Practices","volume":"59","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Krosnick","given":"Jon A."},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean T."},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie M."}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}}],"schema":""} (Table 3, adapted from Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press) refers to the process by which research findings and conclusions become part of a field’s accepted and established base of knowledge ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"7q9sloDl","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press)","plainCitation":"(Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2217,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2217,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"A crescendo of incidents have raised concerns about whether scientific practices in psychology may be suboptimal, sometimes leading to the publication, dissemination, and application of unreliable or misinterpreted findings. Psychology has been a leader in identifying possibly suboptimal practices and proposing reforms that might enhance the efficiency of the scientific process and the publication of robust evidence and interpretations. To help shape future efforts, this paper offers a model of the psychological and socio-structural forces and processes that may influence scientists’ practices. The model identifies practices targeted by interventions and reforms, and which practices remain unaddressed. The model also suggests directions for empirical research to assess how best to enhance the effectiveness of psychological inquiry.","container-title":"Psychologica Belgica","DOI":"10.5334/pb.496","ISSN":"0033-2879","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Psychol Belg","note":"PMID: 31565236\nPMCID: PMC6743032","page":"353-372","source":"PubMed Central","title":"A Social Psychological Model of Scientific Practices: Explaining Research Practices and Outlining the Potential for Successful Reforms","title-short":"A Social Psychological Model of Scientific Practices","volume":"59","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Krosnick","given":"Jon A."},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean T."},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie M."}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}}],"schema":""} (Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press). The social sciences currently have processes, but no consensus or norms, regarding the standards to be used to canonize a finding or conclusion. Descriptively, the process seems to involve claims making it into journals of record (e.g., Psychological Bulletin, Perspectives on Psychological Science, et cetera), Annual Review and Handbook chapters, major textbooks, and the like. But what determines whether findings make it into those outlets of record? It is currently an unclear combination of popularity, prestige, having the right allies and supporters, compellingness of narrative, and validity ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"rZ9TS0tI","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim, Crawford, Anglin, et al., 2016; Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press; Merton, 1973; Tomkins, Zhang, & Heavlin, 2017)","plainCitation":"(Jussim, Crawford, Anglin, et al., 2016; Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press; Merton, 1973; Tomkins, Zhang, & Heavlin, 2017)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2159,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2159,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"We consider how valid conclusions often lay hidden within research reports, masked by plausible but unjustified conclusions reached in those reports. We employ several well-known and cross-cutting examples from the psychological literature to illustrate how, independent (or in the absence) of replicability difficulties or questionable research practices leading to false positives, motivated reasoning and confirmation biases can lead to drawing unjustified conclusions. In describing these examples, we review strategies and methods by which researchers can identify such practices in their own and others' research reports. These strategies and methods can unmask hidden phenomena that may conflict with researchers' preferred narratives, in order to ultimately produce more sound and valid scientific conclusions. We conclude with general recommendations for how social psychologists can limit the influence of interpretive biases in their own and others' research, and thereby elevate the scientific status and validity of social psychology.","collection-title":"Rigorous and Replicable Methods in Social Psychology","container-title":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","DOI":"10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.003","ISSN":"0022-1031","journalAbbreviation":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology","language":"en","page":"116-133","source":"ScienceDirect","title":"Interpretations and methods: Towards a more effectively self-correcting social psychology","title-short":"Interpretations and methods","volume":"66","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie M."},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean T."},{"family":"Duarte","given":"Jose L."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016",9,1]]}}},{"id":2217,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2217,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"A crescendo of incidents have raised concerns about whether scientific practices in psychology may be suboptimal, sometimes leading to the publication, dissemination, and application of unreliable or misinterpreted findings. Psychology has been a leader in identifying possibly suboptimal practices and proposing reforms that might enhance the efficiency of the scientific process and the publication of robust evidence and interpretations. To help shape future efforts, this paper offers a model of the psychological and socio-structural forces and processes that may influence scientists’ practices. The model identifies practices targeted by interventions and reforms, and which practices remain unaddressed. The model also suggests directions for empirical research to assess how best to enhance the effectiveness of psychological inquiry.","container-title":"Psychologica Belgica","DOI":"10.5334/pb.496","ISSN":"0033-2879","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Psychol Belg","note":"PMID: 31565236\nPMCID: PMC6743032","page":"353-372","source":"PubMed Central","title":"A Social Psychological Model of Scientific Practices: Explaining Research Practices and Outlining the Potential for Successful Reforms","title-short":"A Social Psychological Model of Scientific Practices","volume":"59","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Krosnick","given":"Jon A."},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean T."},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie M."}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}},{"id":2267,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2267,"type":"book","event-place":"Chicago, IL","publisher":"University of Chicago Press","publisher-place":"Chicago, IL","title":"The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations","author":[{"family":"Merton","given":"Robert K"}],"editor":[{"family":"Storer","given":"N. W."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1973"]]}}},{"id":2268,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2268,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences","issue":"48","page":"12708–12713","title":"Reviewer bias in single-versus double-blind peer review","volume":"114","author":[{"family":"Tomkins","given":"Andrew"},{"family":"Zhang","given":"Min"},{"family":"Heavlin","given":"William D"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Jussim, Crawford, Anglin, et al., 2016; Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press; Merton, 1973; Tomkins, Zhang, & Heavlin, 2017).?Except for validity, none of these factors constitute grounds for claiming a finding or conclusion is actually true. Table 3 captures this state of affairs. The ideal situation is when valid findings are canonized. If invalid findings are ignored, the canon is also better off, though, of course, we rarely know which findings are valid versus invalid until a skeptical scientific community has had years, sometimes decades, to fully vet the research. The other two cells are even more suboptimal: Canonization of invalid findings can lead to a Reign of Error (and psychology’s replication crisis strongly suggests that is exactly what we have had in many areas for the last several decades); and failure to canonize valid findings harms the field by depriving it of valid knowledge.Canonization is where the biases articulated in the prior sections on questions, measurement, interpretations, and citations all come together in ways that actually matter. When solid research is blithely ignored because it fails to fit liberal/equalitarian narratives, it impoverishes the social science canon. Furthermore, to the extent that the largely overlooked work is actually superior in methodological quality to the cited work (see Tables 1 and 2), it may actually contribute to a Reign of Error, whereby flawed studies of limited generalizability are taken to represent the field’s general knowledge. When certain questions go unasked, the canon cannot possibly have answered them. When we use flawed or biased measures, our interpretations of findings may be distorted at best and wrong at worst. When we reach consistently unjustified interpretations, we produce a Reign of Error. And even if all this is corrected in the scientific literature, if those corrections go largely ignored (uncited), the Reign of Error can persist.?? ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"4emjgM2k","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Ellemers, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Ellemers, 2018)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2265,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2265,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"There are many differences between men and women. To some extent, these are captured in the stereotypical images of these groups. Stereotypes about the way men and women think and behave are widely shared, suggesting a kernel of truth. However, stereotypical expectations not only reflect existing differences, but also impact the way men and women define themselves and are treated by others. This article reviews evidence on the nature and content of gender stereotypes and considers how these relate to gender differences in important life outcomes. Empirical studies show that gender stereotypes affect the way people attend to, interpret, and remember information about themselves and others. Considering the cognitive and motivational functions of gender stereotypes helps us understand their impact on implicit beliefs and communications about men and women. Knowledge of the literature on this subject can benefit the fair judgment of individuals in situations where gender stereotypes are likely to play a role.","container-title":"Annual Review of Psychology","DOI":"10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011719","issue":"1","note":"PMID: 28961059","page":"275-298","source":"Annual Reviews","title":"Gender Stereotypes","volume":"69","author":[{"family":"Ellemers","given":"Naomi"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":""} Ellemers (2018) review of gender stereotypes can be taken as a paradigmatic case. It appeared in Annual Review of Psychology, one of the outlets of record for our field. It also concluded that gender stereotypes were mostly inaccurate—without citing a single one of the 11 papers reporting 16 separate studies that actually assessed the accuracy of gender stereotypes ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"MFwAw3bS","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim, 2018b)","plainCitation":"(Jussim, 2018b)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2263,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2263,"type":"post-weblog","abstract":"\"Gender Stereotypes are Inaccurate\" if You Ignore the Data","container-title":"Psychology Today","language":"en-US","title":"\"Gender Stereotypes are Inaccurate\" if You Ignore the Data","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",6,5]]}}}],"schema":""} (see Jussim, 2018b, for details). Those 11 papers consistently found that gender stereotypes ranged from moderately to highly accurate.??We note here that it is not the case that the accuracy work could not or did not get published; it clearly did. However, to therefore assume that our science has self-corrected the erroneous claim that gender stereotypes are generally inaccurate would be to commit the fundamental publication error ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"0xMDk0XX","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim, 2017)","plainCitation":"(Jussim, 2017)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1332,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1332,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Behavioral and Brain Sciences","DOI":"10.1017/S0140525X16000339","title":"Accuracy, bias, self-fulfilling prophecies, and scientific self-correction","volume":"40","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Jussim, 2017). This refers to the mistaken belief that, just because something has been published correcting past scientific errors, the scientific record has been corrected. If the work correcting errors is ignored, no correction has taken place. ConclusionPolitical bias can slip in and distort the research process and scientific pursuit of truth at many stages, influencing who becomes an academic social scientist, the questions asked, the measures used, how research findings are interpreted, ideas and findings being suppressed, what is cited, and the canonization of research findings. The existence of political bias in academic research can damage the reputation and credibility of individual researchers, whole fields, and academia itself. It increases skepticism among key consumers such as policy makers, judges, and the public ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"QxKe3vAJ","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Cofnas, Carl, & Woodley of Menie, 2017; Duarte et al., 2015; Gauchat, 2012; Redding, 2001)","plainCitation":"(Cofnas, Carl, & Woodley of Menie, 2017; Duarte et al., 2015; Gauchat, 2012; Redding, 2001)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1144,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1144,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Data from the General Social Survey suggest that conservatives have become less trustful of scientists since the 1970s. Gauchat argues that this is because conservatives increasingly see scientific findings as threatening to their worldview. However, the General Social Survey data concern trust in scientists, not in science. We suggest that conservatives’ diminishing trust in scientists reflects the fact that scientists in certain fields, particularly social science, have increasingly adopted a liberal-activist stance, seeking to influence public policy in a liberal direction.","container-title":"The American Sociologist","DOI":"10.1007/s12108-017-9362-0","ISSN":"0003-1232, 1936-4784","journalAbbreviation":"Am Soc","language":"en","page":"1-14","source":"link-springer-com.proxy.libraries.rutgers.edu","title":"Does activism in social science explain conservatives’ distrust of scientists?","author":[{"family":"Cofnas","given":"Nathan"},{"family":"Carl","given":"Noah"},{"family":"Woodley of Menie","given":"Michael A."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017",7,19]]}}},{"id":571,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":571,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Behavioral and Brain Sciences","DOI":"10.1017/S0140525X14000430","ISSN":"1469-1825","title":"Political diversity will improve social psychological science","URL":"","volume":"38","author":[{"family":"Duarte","given":"José L."},{"family":"Crawford","given":"Jarret T."},{"family":"Stern","given":"Charlotta"},{"family":"Haidt","given":"Jonathan"},{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Tetlock","given":"Philip E."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015",1]]}}},{"id":1424,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1424,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"American Sociological Review","issue":"2","page":"167–187","title":"Politicization of science in the public sphere: A study of public trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010","volume":"77","author":[{"family":"Gauchat","given":"Gordon"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2012"]]}}},{"id":401,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":401,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"American Psychologist","issue":"3","page":"205-215","title":"Sociopolitical diversity in psychology: The case for pluralism.","volume":"56","author":[{"family":"Redding","given":"Richard E"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2001"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Cofnas, Carl, & Woodley of Menie, 2017; Duarte et al., 2015; Gauchat, 2012; Redding, 2001). The patterns of bias described in this review may also at least partially explain why there has been such a strong decline in support for science among conservatives, who, with some justification, see science on politicized issues as itself hopelessly politicized ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"JehvI96C","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Cofnas et al., 2017; Gauchat, 2012)","plainCitation":"(Cofnas et al., 2017; Gauchat, 2012)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1144,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1144,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"Data from the General Social Survey suggest that conservatives have become less trustful of scientists since the 1970s. Gauchat argues that this is because conservatives increasingly see scientific findings as threatening to their worldview. However, the General Social Survey data concern trust in scientists, not in science. We suggest that conservatives’ diminishing trust in scientists reflects the fact that scientists in certain fields, particularly social science, have increasingly adopted a liberal-activist stance, seeking to influence public policy in a liberal direction.","container-title":"The American Sociologist","DOI":"10.1007/s12108-017-9362-0","ISSN":"0003-1232, 1936-4784","journalAbbreviation":"Am Soc","language":"en","page":"1-14","source":"link-springer-com.proxy.libraries.rutgers.edu","title":"Does activism in social science explain conservatives’ distrust of scientists?","author":[{"family":"Cofnas","given":"Nathan"},{"family":"Carl","given":"Noah"},{"family":"Woodley of Menie","given":"Michael A."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017",7,19]]}}},{"id":1424,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":1424,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"American Sociological Review","issue":"2","page":"167–187","title":"Politicization of science in the public sphere: A study of public trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010","volume":"77","author":[{"family":"Gauchat","given":"Gordon"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2012"]]}}}],"schema":""} (Cofnas et al., 2017; Gauchat, 2012). We further note that the phenomena reviewed herein likely synergistically combine to undermine the credibility of science with all but the liberal members of the lay public. The lack of conservatives in the social sciences, combined with explicit endorsement of discrimination against conservatives, gives lay conservatives ample reasons to doubt the validity of conclusions seeming to support liberal, equalitarian, social justice narratives. We urge readers to imagine a counterfactual: That the social sciences included a large minority of conservative scientists, that our methods were actually capable of providing clear scientific answers to controversial and politicized issues, and that most scientists valued truth over politics. In this hypothetical world, high quality methods could lead both liberal and conservative social scientists to converge on answers to some difficult questions. In this case, we speculate that research findings from this hypothetical world would have far higher credibility among the lay public for two reasons: 1. Representation of a broad ideological range of views among scientists signals a commitment to fairness, openness, and honesty; and 2. It guarantees that a large number of scientists (if consensus is reached) on everyone’s ‘side’ confirm the validity of the finding, regardless of whose political narrative it validates. This should make it far more difficult to dismiss scientific findings as partisan ax-grinding by other means. Furthermore, by virtue of experts on one’s own side endorsing the research, the findings may be rendered far more palatable. Although we are not suggesting that vigorous embrace of intellectual and political diversity in the social sciences is some sort of scientific panacea, this hypothetical world—which contrasts sharply with our actual world—captures some of the potential benefits social science might reap by rectifying its political lack of diversity and taking its political bias problems seriously. ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"Y04EoN3X","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Clark & Winegard, in press)","plainCitation":"(Clark & Winegard, in press)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2087,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2087,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"We argue that because of a long history of intergroup conflict and competition, humans evolved\nto be tribal creatures. Tribalism is not inherently bad, but it can lead to ideological thinking and sacred values that distort cognitive processing of putatively objective information in ways that affirm and strengthen the views and well-being of one’s ingroup (and that increase one’s own standing within one’s ingroup). Because of this shared evolutionary history of intergroup conflict, liberals and conservatives likely share the same underlying tribal psychology, which creates the potential for ideologically distorted information processing. Over the past several decades, social scientists have sedulously documented various tribal and ideological psychological tendencies on the political right, and more recent work has documented similar tendencies on the political left. We contend that these tribal tendencies and propensities can lead to ideologically distorted information processing in any group. And this ideological epistemology can become especially problematic for the pursuit of the truth when groups are ideologically homogenous and hold sacred values that might be contradicted by empirical inquiry. Evidence suggests that these conditions might hold for modern social science; therefore, we conclude by exploring potential ideologically driven distortions in the social sciences.","collection-title":"winegar","container-title":"Psychological Inquiry","title":"Tribalism in war and peace: The nature and evolution of ideological epistemology and its significance for modern social science","author":[{"family":"Clark","given":"Cory J."},{"family":"Winegard","given":"Bo M."}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}}],"schema":""} Clark and Winegard (in press) close their review and arguments suggesting that social scientists should take a moment to be introspective—to apply their own theories and scholarship to themselves. To aid in this effort, Jussim & Crawford (2017) reviewed research identifing a slew of actions that scientists can take now to limit their vulnerability to such biases. Although space does not permit a deep exposition here, in brief, those included: increase one’s own exposure to politically diverse views as espoused by those who hold them (rather than [mis]characterizations of those views by their opponents), include political views in diversity statements and programs, subject all work (including equalitarianism-validating work) to intense scientific skepticism, use strong inference (design studies to test competing alternative theoretical perspectives), wait to bring research-based interventions into public applications until after the underlying research has undergone a long period of skeptical scientific vetting, and develop hypotheses and research programs based on theoretical predictions that are so strong they leave little room for political biases. We echo Clark & Winegard’s hope that social scientists will become more aware of their biases. Through the type of critical introspection they called for, and by acting on some of these recommendations described, we also hope this will work toward curtailing its influence on social science research.FiguresFigure 1: Preliminary Theoretical Model for Manifestations of Political Bias in Social ScienceTablesTable 1: Citations to Two Papers Finding Opposite Patterns of Gender BiasNumber of ExperimentsTotal Sample SizeMain FindingTotalCitations (Google Scholar, 12-9-19)Citations Since 2015 (Google Scholar, 12-9-19) ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"bE15XYYH","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Williams & Ceci, 2015)","plainCitation":"(Williams & Ceci, 2015)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":817,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":817,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences","issue":"17","page":"5360–5365","title":"National hiring experiments reveal 2: 1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track","volume":"112","author":[{"family":"Williams","given":"Wendy M"},{"family":"Ceci","given":"Stephen J"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015"]]}}}],"schema":""} Williams & Ceci (2015)5873Bias favoring women217194 ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"CNY0jq0z","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Moss-Racusin, Dovidio, Brescoll, Graham, & Handelsman, 2012)","plainCitation":"(Moss-Racusin, Dovidio, Brescoll, Graham, & Handelsman, 2012)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":778,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":778,"type":"article-journal","container-title":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences","issue":"41","page":"16474–16479","title":"Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students","volume":"109","author":[{"family":"Moss-Racusin","given":"Corinne A"},{"family":"Dovidio","given":"John F"},{"family":"Brescoll","given":"Victoria L"},{"family":"Graham","given":"Mark J"},{"family":"Handelsman","given":"Jo"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2012"]]}}}],"schema":""} Moss-Racusin, et al. (2012)1127Bias favoring men19351470Table 2: Citations to Papers Based on Whether or not They Found Gender Bias Favoring MenFound Biases Favoring Men(Four Papers)Found Unbiased Responding or Biases Favoring Women(Six Papers)Median Sample Size182.52311.5Citations per year51.59.00Data based on those reported in ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"hcxXxuLp","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim, 2019)","plainCitation":"(Jussim, 2019)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2270,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2270,"type":"post-weblog","abstract":"Studies that find bias against women often get disproportionate attention.","container-title":"Psychology Today","language":"en-US","title":"Scientific Bias in Favor of Studies Finding Gender Bias","URL":"","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019",6,23]]}}}],"schema":""} (Jussim, 2019)Table 3: The Importance of CanonizationPublished Research Is:IgnoredCanonizedInvalidIRRELEVANT:No Major HarmREIGN OF ERROR:Misunderstanding, misrepresentation, bad theory, ineffective and possibly counterproductive applicationsValidLOSS:Understanding, Theory and Applications Deprived of Relevant KnowledgeIDEAL:Understanding, Theory and Applications Enhanced by Relevant KnowledgeAdapted from ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"4ODPRppW","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press)","plainCitation":"(Jussim, Krosnick, et al., in press)","dontUpdate":true,"noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":2217,"uris":[""],"uri":[""],"itemData":{"id":2217,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"A crescendo of incidents have raised concerns about whether scientific practices in psychology may be suboptimal, sometimes leading to the publication, dissemination, and application of unreliable or misinterpreted findings. Psychology has been a leader in identifying possibly suboptimal practices and proposing reforms that might enhance the efficiency of the scientific process and the publication of robust evidence and interpretations. To help shape future efforts, this paper offers a model of the psychological and socio-structural forces and processes that may influence scientists’ practices. The model identifies practices targeted by interventions and reforms, and which practices remain unaddressed. The model also suggests directions for empirical research to assess how best to enhance the effectiveness of psychological inquiry.","container-title":"Psychologica Belgica","DOI":"10.5334/pb.496","ISSN":"0033-2879","issue":"1","journalAbbreviation":"Psychol Belg","note":"PMID: 31565236\nPMCID: PMC6743032","page":"353-372","source":"PubMed Central","title":"A Social Psychological Model of Scientific Practices: Explaining Research Practices and Outlining the Potential for Successful Reforms","title-short":"A Social Psychological Model of Scientific Practices","volume":"59","author":[{"family":"Jussim","given":"Lee"},{"family":"Krosnick","given":"Jon A."},{"family":"Stevens","given":"Sean T."},{"family":"Anglin","given":"Stephanie M."}],"issued":{"literal":"in press"}}}],"schema":""} Jussim, Krosnick, et al. (in press)References ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Al-Gharbi, M. (2018, March 29). Underrepresentation: Race, Gender, Sexuality, Ideology. Retrieved from Heterodox Academy website: Psychological Association. (2015). Demographic Characteristics of APA Members by Membership Characteristics, 2014. Retrieved from Psychological Association. (2018). Demographics of the U.S. psychology workforce: Findings from the 2007-16 American Community Survey. Retrieved from , J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 230–244. , R. M., Albright, L., & Malloy, T. E. (1995). Effects of Behavioral and Social Class Information on Social Judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(4), 308–315. , H. S. (1967). Whose side are we on? Social Problems, 14(3), 239–247.Blanton, H., Jaccard, J., Klick, J., Mellers, B., Mitchell, G., & Tetlock, P. E. (2009). Strong claims and weak evidence: Reassessing the predictive validity of the IAT. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(3), 567–582.Brandt, M. J., Reyna, C., Chambers, J. R., Crawford, J. T., & Wetherell, G. (2014). The ideological-conflict hypothesis: Intolerance among both liberals and conservatives. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(1), 27–34. , A. J., & Goh, J. X. (2016). Some Evidence for a Gender Gap in Personality and Social Psychology. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(5), 437–443. , J. R., & Schlenker, B. R. (2015). Political homogeneity can nurture threats to research validity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences; New York, 38, n/a. , E. (2015). Liberal bias and the five-factor model. Behavioral and Brain Sciences; New York, 38, n/a. , C. J., & Winegard, B. M. (in press). Tribalism in war and peace: The nature and evolution of ideological epistemology and its significance for modern social science. Psychological Inquiry.Cofnas, N., Carl, N., & Woodley of Menie, M. A. (2017). Does activism in social science explain conservatives’ distrust of scientists? The American Sociologist, 1–14. , L. G., Houck, S. C., Gornick, L. J., & Repke, M. A. (2018). Finding the Loch Ness Monster: Left-Wing Authoritarianism in the United States. Political Psychology, 39(5), 1049–1067. , J., Major, B., & Steele, C. M. (1998). Social stigma. In Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 504–553). McGraw-Hill.Danbold, F., & Unzueta, M. M. (2019). Drawing the diversity line: Numerical thresholds of diversity vary by group status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. , J. M., & Gross, P. H. (1983). A hypothesis-confirming bias in labeling effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 20–33. , N., & Stout, J. G. (2014). Girls and women in Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics STEMing the tide and broadening participation in STEM careers. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(1), 21–29. , T. S. (2004). Teachers, race, and student achievement in a randomized experiment. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(1), 195–210. , P. H., Liu, B., Clark, C. J., Wojcik, S. P., Chen, E. E., Grady, R. H., … Zinger, J. F. (2018). At Least Bias Is Bipartisan: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Partisan Bias in Liberals and Conservatives. Perspectives on Psychological Science. , S., Klein, O., Pichon, C.-L., & Cleeremans, A. (2012). Behavioral Priming: It’s All in the Mind, but Whose Mind? PLOS ONE, 7(1), e29081. , J. L., Crawford, J. T., Stern, C., Haidt, J., Jussim, L., & Tetlock, P. E. (2015). Political diversity will improve social psychological science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 38. , O., Viganola, D., Inbar, Y., Dreber, A., Johannesson, M., Pfeiffer, T., … Uhlmann, E. L. (2018). Is research in social psychology politically biased? Systematic empirical tests and a forecasting survey to address the controversy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 79, 188–199. , N. (2018). Gender Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 69(1), 275–298. , J. A. C. (2015). “Wait – You’re a conservative?” Political diversity and the dilemma of disclosure. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 38. , K. M., & Corker, K. S. (2016). Do performance avoidance goals moderate the effect of different types of stereotype threat on women’s math performance? Journal of Research in Personality, 63, 36–43. , S. T., Gilbert, D. T., & Lindzey, G. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of social psychology (5th ed.). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.Flake, J. K. & Fried, E. I. (2019). Measurement Schmeasurement: Questionable measurement practices and how to avoid them. Unpublished manuscript.Gauchat, G. (2012). Politicization of science in the public sphere: A study of public trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010. American Sociological Review, 77(2), 167–187.Greenwald, A. G., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2015). Statistically small effects of the Implicit Association Test can have societally large effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(4), 553–561.Greider, C. W., Sheltzer, J. M., Cantalupo, N. C., Copeland, W. B., Dasgupta, N., Hopkins, N., … Wong, J. Y. (2019). Increasing gender diversity in the STEM research workforce. Science, 366(6466), 692–695. , J. (2011, January). The bright future of post-partisan social psychology. Presented at the Talk given at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, San Antonio, TX. Retrieved from *jdh6n/postpartisan.htmlHaidt, J. (2017, September 2). In Defense of Amy Wax’s Defense of Bourgeois Values. Retrieved from Heterodox Academy website: , J., Cantor, N., Carnes, M., Denton, D., Fine, E., Grosz, B., … Sheridan, J. (2005). More Women in Science. Science, 309(5738), 1190–1191. , J. B., Walberg, M. D., & Peterson, J. B. (2013). Spiritual Liberals and Religious Conservatives. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(1), 14–20. , N., & Freberg, L. (2017). The liberal and conservative experience across academic disciplines: An extension of Inbar and Lammers. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(2), 115–123. , N., Jussim, L., & Freberg, L. (2019). University students’ perceptions of the classroom political climate. Working paper.Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60(6), 581–592.Inbar, Y., & Lammers, J. (2012). Political diversity in social and personality psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(5), 496–503.Jost, J. T., Glasser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.Jost, J. T., Rudman, L. A., Blair, I. V., Carney, D. R., Dasgupta, N., Glaser, J., & Hardin, C. D. (2009). The existence of implicit bias is beyond reasonable doubt: A refutation of ideological and methodological objections and executive summary of ten studies that no manager should ignore. Research in Organizational Behavior, 29, 39–69. , L. (2012). Social Perception and Social Reality: Why Accuracy Dominates Bias and Self-Fulfilling Prophecy. Oxford University Press, USA.Jussim, L. (2017). Accuracy, bias, self-fulfilling prophecies, and scientific self-correction. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40. , L. (2018a, March 17). The Reality of the Rise of an Intolerant and Radical Left on Campus. Retrieved from Areo website: , L. (2018b, June 5). “Gender Stereotypes are Inaccurate” if You Ignore the Data. Retrieved from Psychology Today website: , L. (2019, June 23). Scientific Bias in Favor of Studies Finding Gender Bias. Retrieved from Psychology Today website: , L., Careem, A., Goldberg, Z., Honeycutt, N., & Stevens, S. (in press). IAT scores, racial gaps, and scientific gaps. In J. A. Krosnick, T. H. Stark, & A. L. Scott (Eds.), The Future of Research on Implicit Bias.Jussim, L. & Crawford, J. T. (2018). Possible solutions for a less politicized social psychological science. In J. T. Crawford & L. Jussim (Eds.), The Politics of Social Psychology (pp. 126–146). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Jussim, L., Crawford, J. T., Anglin, S. M., Stevens, S. T., & Duarte, J. L. (2016). Interpretations and methods: Towards a more effectively self-correcting social psychology. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66, 116–133. , L., Crawford, J. T., Anglin, S., & Stevens, S. (2015). Ideological bias in social psychological research. In J. Forgas, K. Fiedler, & W. Crano (Eds.), Sydney Symposium on Social Psychology and Politics. (pp. 91–109). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.Jussim, L., Crawford, J. T., Stevens, S., Anglin, S., & Duarte, J. L. (2016). Do high moral purposes undermine scientific integrity? In J. P. Forgas, Van Lange, & L. Jussim (Eds.), The Sydney Symposium on the Social Psychology of Morality. New York: Taylor & Francis.Jussim, L., Crawford, J. T., Stevens, S. T., & Anglin, S. (2016). The politics of social psychological science: Distortions in the social psychology of intergroup relations. In P. Valdesolo & J. Graham (Eds.), Claremont Symposium on Social Psychology and Politics.Jussim, L., Krosnick, J. A., Stevens, S. T., & Anglin, S. M. (in press). A Social Psychological Model of Scientific Practices: Explaining Research Practices and Outlining the Potential for Successful Reforms. Psychologica Belgica, 59(1), 353–372. , L., Stevens, S. T., & Honeycutt, N. (2018). Unasked questions about stereotype accuracy. Archives of Scientific Psychology, 6(1), 214–229. , S., Glynn, C. J., & Huge, M. (2013). The Matilda Effect in Science Communication: An Experiment on Gender Bias in Publication Quality Perceptions and Collaboration Interest. Science Communication, 35(5), 603–625. , Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480.Kunda, Z., & Thagard, P. (1996). Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and behaviors: A parallel-constraint-satisfaction theory. Psychological Review, 103(2), 284–308.Langbert, M. (2018). Homogenous: The Political Affiliations of Elite Liberal Arts College Faculty. Academic Questions, 31(2), 186–197. , A., Haines, E., & Ratliff, K. (2015). Guest Post: Not Nutting Up or Shutting Up. Retrieved from , C. (2015, December 4). How a rebellious scientist uncovered the surprising truth about stereotypes. Retrieved from Quillette website: , S. O. (2015). Lack of political diversity and the framing of findings in personality and clinical psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences; New York, 38, n/a. , S. O. (2017). Microaggressions: Strong claims, inadequate evidence. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(1), 138–169. , A., Borgida, E., Brekke, N., & Hepburn, C. (1980). Sex stereotypes and social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 821–831. , A., Lelkes, Y., & Holzer, N. (2018). Rethinking the rigidity of the right model: Three suboptimal methodological practices and their implications. In J. T. Crawford & L. Jussim (Eds.), The Politics of Social Psychology (pp. 126–146). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Marsden, G. M. (2015). Religious Discrimination in Academia. Society, 52(1), 19–22. , C. C. (2015). How Ideology Has Hindered Sociological Insight. The American Sociologist, 47(1), 115–130. , R. (2018, May 31). Continued Political Bias in Social Psychology. Retrieved from Psychology Today website: , R. K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations (N. W. Storer, Ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Milkman, K. L., Akinola, M., & Chugh, D. (2012). Temporal Distance and Discrimination: An Audit Study in Academia. Psychological Science, 23(7), 710–717. , C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(41), 16474–16479.Murphy, M. C., Steele, C. M., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Signaling Threat How Situational Cues Affect Women in Math, Science, and Engineering Settings. Psychological Science, 18(10), 879–885. Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018). Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. National Academies Press.Nature. (2015). Sexism has no place in science. Nature, 522(7556), 255–255. , R. S. (1998). Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220. , U., Honeycutt, N., Block, A. D., & Jussim, L. (in press). Ideological Diversity, Hostility, and Discrimination in Philosophy. Philosophical Psychology.Pew Research Center. (2018). The Religious Typology. Retrieved from , D. A. (2012). Liberal norms and their discontents. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(5), 516-518. DOI: 10.1177/1745691612454142Quillette. (2019, May 28). Noah Carl: An Update on the Young Scholar Fired by a Cambridge College for Thoughtcrime. Retrieved from Quillette website: , D. M., & Chaudoir, S. R. (2009). Living with a concealable stigmatized identity: The impact of anticipated stigma, centrality, salience, and cultural stigma on psychological distress and health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(4), 634.Redding, R. E. (2001). Sociopolitical diversity in psychology: The case for pluralism. American Psychologist, 56(3), 205–215.Redding, R. E. (2012). Likes Attract: The Sociopolitical Groupthink of (Social) Psychologists. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(5), 512–515. , D. A. (2019, October 22). The path to professorship by the numbers and why mentorship matters. Retrieved from Behavioural and Social Sciences at Nature Research website: , C. (2018). Scale creation, use, and misuse: How politics undermines measurement. In J. T. Crawford & L. Jussim (Eds.), Politics of Social Psychology (pp. 81–98). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Ryan, W. (1971). Blaming the Victim. New York: Vintage Books.Sears, D. O. (1988). Symbolic Racism. In P. A. Katz & D. A. Taylor (Eds.), Eliminating Racism: Profiles in Controversy (pp. 53–84). , G. (2010, May 22). Sex, College Degrees, and Campus Equity—Sociological Images. Retrieved from The Society Pages: Sociological Images website: , A. (1973). The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype Threat and Women’s Math Performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 4–28. . (2019). Society for Personality and Social Psychology: Leadership. Retrieved December 12, 2019, from Diversity and Climate Committee. (2019). SPSP diversity and climate survey. Retrieved from , K. E., & Toplak, M. E. (2019). The need for intellectual diversity in psychological science: Our own studies of actively open-minded thinking as a case study. Cognition, 187, 156–166. , C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797–811. , J., James, J. B., & Barnett, R. C. (2016). Learning in a Man’s World: Examining the Perceptions of Undergraduate Women in Male-Dominated Academic Areas: Psychology of Women Quarterly. Retrieved from , R. E., Anders, K. A., & Ritzke, D. (1999). The Impact of Gender on the Review of the Curricula Vitae of Job Applicants and Tenure Candidates: A National Empirical Study. Sex Roles, 41(7), 509–528. , E., Eagan, M., Zimmerman, H., Berdan Lozano, J., Cesar-Davis, N., Aragon, M., & Rios-Aguilar, C. (2019). Undergraduate teaching faculty: The HERI Faculty Survey 2016–2017. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA.Tetlock, P. E. (1994). Political psychology or politicized psychology: Is the road to scientific hell paved with good moral intentions? Political Psychology, 15(3), 509–529. , P. E., & Mitchell, G. (2015). Why so Few Conservatives and Should we Care? Society, 52(1), 28–34.Tetlock, P., & Mitchell, G. (1993). Liberal and Conservative Approaches to Justice: Conflicting Psychological Portraits. In B. A. Mellers & J. Baron (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on justice: Theory and applications (pp. 234–255). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Tomkins, A., Zhang, M., & Heavlin, W. D. (2017). Reviewer bias in single-versus double-blind peer review. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(48), 12708–12713.United States National Academy of Sciences. (2007). Beyond bias and barriers: Fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.U.S. Census Bureau. (2018, July 1). U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: United States. Retrieved from Hiel, A., Onraet, E., & De Pauw, S. (2010). The Relationship Between Social-Cultural Attitudes and Behavioral Measures of Cognitive Style: A Meta-Analytic Integration of Studies. Journal of Personality, 78(6), 1765–1800. Hippel, W., & Buss, D. M. (2017). Do ideologically driven scientific agendas impede the understanding and acceptance of evolutionary principles in social psychology? In Crawford, J.T. & Jussim, L. (Eds.), The Politics of Social Psychology (pp. 17–35). New York: Psychology Press.Wax, A., & Alexander, L. (2017, August 9). Paying the price for breakdown of the country’s bourgeois culture. Retrieved from The Philadelphia Inquirer website: , B. S. (2018, May 22). Oppression Disguised as Equity. Retrieved from , C., & Wold, A. (1997). Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. Nature, 387(6631), 341–343. , W. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2015). National hiring experiments reveal 2: 1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(17), 5360–5365.Wills, J. B., Brewster, Z. W., & Nowak, G. R. (2019). Students’ Religiosity and Perceptions of Professor Bias: Some Empirical Lessons for Sociologists. The American Sociologist, 50(1), 136–153. , M., & Kelly-Woessner, A. (2009). Left pipeline: Why conservatives don’t get doctorates. In R. Maranto, R. E. Redding, & F. Hess (Eds.), The politically correct university: Problems, scope, and reforms (pp. 38–59). Washington, DC: AEI Press.WTF is the IDW? (2018, June 20). Retrieved from , G., Reimer, S., & O’Connell, J. (2015). How Academics View Conservative Protestants. Sociology of Religion, 76(3), 315–336. , L. J. (2018). Black and White discrimination in the United States: Evidence from an archive of survey experiment studies. Research & Politics, 5(1), 2053168017753862. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download