{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01845444059976932, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004844290657439446, 'mean_word_length': 5.629969418960244, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
EDITORIAL: Increasing the Representation of Diversity in the Psi Chi Journal

In the fall issue of the Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research, Rihana Mason (2021) reflected on the limited representation of diversity in the field of psychology. If public representations of psychologists only portray nondisabled White men, then it is less likely that people of color (e.g., Black, Indigenous, Latinx, Asian-American), women, and those with disabilities will be able to envision themselves within this important profession. However, if intentional efforts are put into practice to portray a more diverse profession, she predicted that we would see a more diverse career pipeline develop, which would allow our profession to be better suited for meeting the needs of a diverse society. Although Mason focused primarily on changes that can happen within educational institutions (e.g., creating career training courses at undergraduate levels, sponsoring conference attendance for undergraduate students who come from underrepresented populations, selecting textbooks and other educational curricula that include the accomplishments of women and people of color), equally important questions can be raised about how to increase equitable representation in empirical psychological research. Not only is there a lack of representation of diversity in public images of psychologists, but inequitable representation can also be seen within the pages of psychological research journals. Roberts and colleagues (2020) noted four troubling trends in past and current psychological research, especially in consideration of racial representation. First, articles specifically addressing topics of racial diversity comprised a very small proportion of the psychological research literature. Approximately 5% of the articles they reviewed between the 1970s and 2010s explicitly highlighted topics of race in their titles and/or abstracts. Focusing primarily on what some psychologists may consider race-neutral, universal topics, researchers have not marshaled their collective efforts toward focusing on important topics of diversity. Second, Roberts and colleagues noted a lack of diversity among those who make important decisions regarding which manuscripts get published in research journals. In their review of journal leadership, few editors-in-chief and few associate editors were people of color. Instead, the editorial boards were overrepresented by White psychologists. The impact of this overrepresentation was stark; White editors were significantly less likely to have published articles that highlight important topics of race. This suggests that increased representation of diversity within editorial boards might result in more publications about topics related to diversity. Roberts and colleagues’ third troubling observation was that the majority of published research articles focusing on aspects of race were written by White authors. One implication is that when research on racial diversity is published those articles may carry subtle assumptions and perspectives of European American worldviews. Even when authors sincerely commit to the highest levels of intentional objectivity, their work may reflect the perspectives that derive from their own identity positionality. Fourth, Roberts and colleagues observed that White participants are often overrepresented in research articles. Although diverse samples were observed more often when the authors were people of color, White researchers tended to publish articles that were overrepresented by the experiences of their White participants. Roberts and colleagues (2020) painted a concerning picture of the lack of racial representation in the psychological research process, and the same patterns of underrepresentation are likely to exist for gender diversity, diversity of ability and disability, and sexual identity diversity as well. As I write this editorial, I am in my second week as the new editor of the Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research, having moved into this position after Debi Brannan’s impressive five-year term as editor. Although I have served as an associate editor for seven years, I am excited for the opportunity to take on a new leadership role for the journal. EDITORIAL: Increasing the Representation of Diversity in the Psi Chi Journal