We are pleased to announce a forthcoming special issue of Psychology of Women Quarterly on Feminist Psychology and Open Science: Challenges and Opportunities. See below for details about the issue and information about proposals.
Background and aims
In recent years, sparked by evidence of data fraud, questionable research practices, and low rates of replicability, there has been an increased push to make psychological research more open and transparent (Shrout & Rodgers, 2018). The open science movement has diverse goals, most of which focus on increasing the validity and reproducibility of scientific research (Hesse, 2018; Nosek et al., 2015). For a variety of reasons, the introduction of open science has polarized the field and remains a controversial topic for many social scientists (see Mirowski, 2018). The unique challenges and opportunities that open science poses for feminist psychologists have yet to be systematically considered. Psychological science has historically silenced and devalued the perspectives of women and other marginalized groups (MacArthur & Shields, 2014), and the open science movement is no exception (GenderAction, 2019). Feminist psychology has long played a role in destabilizing patriarchal norms and customs in the field by challenging traditional methodologies and research practices and creating space for women’s voices and experiences (Eagly, Eaton, Rose, Riger, & McHugh, 2012). The goal of this special issue is to present a diversity of feminist psychologists’ perspectives on open science and its application to and implications for feminist psychological research.
In this special issue, we pose several questions:
- What are the benefits and disadvantages of engaging in open science practices for feminist psychologists? What are the barriers to successfully engaging with open science, and how can we facilitate a culture in which the use of open methods is more normative? Should we?
- Is open science a promising way forward for feminist psychology, or is it an imperative that may further silence and censor feminist psychologists?
- In what ways do the goals of the open science movement complement or contradict the goals of feminist psychology? How might a growing emphasis on “replication” and “reproducibility” in the open science movement undermine the significance of critical feminist research, particularly qualitative methods (e.g., storytelling, participatory action research, grounded theory, phenomenology, discourse analysis)?
- How has the open science initiative improved or challenged your own work as a feminist researcher? How can feminist psychologists integrate open science practices into their own research, perhaps in unconventional or negotiated ways?
We invite submissions to the special issue that consider these questions and related ideas on the relation between feminist psychology and open science.
Submissions for initial consideration should consist of detailed abstracts of 2 double-spaced pages followed by a short biography (limited to half a page) of each author. Manuscript submissions will be peer reviewed and invitation of a full paper (following abstract submission) does not guarantee publication. We encourage and will strive for a diversity of voices from feminist psychologists.
Submit detailed abstracts and biographies by April 15th, 2020, to Jaclyn Siegel at firstname.lastname@example.org. Questions and inquiries may also be directed to any of the other guest editors (Dr. Rachel Calogero, Dr. Asia Eaton, or Dr. Tomi-Ann Roberts). Approximately 6-10 papers will be selected for the final issue. The special issue editors plan to notify authors of selection decisions by mid-June 2020.
If your abstract results in an invitation to submit a full manuscript, completed manuscripts will be due October 15th, 2020. Manuscripts must be prepared according to the Manuscript Submission information available on the Psychology of Women Quarterly home page (https://journals.sagepub.com/home/pwq) and submitted electronically through the journal’s manuscript submission portal (https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/pwq).
We look forward to reading your proposals.
Jaclyn Siegel, M.S. (email@example.com)
Rachel Calogero, Ph.D. (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Asia Eaton, Ph.D. (email@example.com)
Tomi-Ann Roberts, Ph.D. (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Eagly, A. H., Eaton, A., Rose, S. M., Riger, S., & McHugh, M. C. (2012). Feminism and Psychology: Analysis of a half-century of research on women and gender. American Psychologist, 67(2), 211-230.
GenderAction (2019). Report on strategic advice for enhancing the gender dimension of open science and innovation policy. Retrieved from https://genderaction.eu › GENDERACTION_Report-5.1_D11_OSOI.pdf
Hesse, B. W. (2018). Can psychology walk the walk of open science? American Psychologist, 73(2), 126–137.
MacArthur, H., & Shields, S. (2014). Psychology’s Feminist Voices: A critical pedagogical tool. Sex Roles, 70(9), 431-433.
Mirowski, P. (2018). The future(s) of open science. Social Studies of Science, 48(2), 171-203.
Nosek, B. A., Alter, G., Banks, G. C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S. D., & … Yarkoni, T. (2015)
Rodgers, J. L., & Shrout, P. E. (2018). Psychology’s replication crisis as scientific opportunity: A précis for policymakers.” Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5(1), 134–141.
Shrout, P. E., & Rodgers, J. L. (2018). Psychology, science, and knowledge construction: Broadening perspectives from the replication crisis. Annual Review of Psychology, 69, 487-510. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011845