Open Science and Multicultural Research: Some Data, Considerations, and Recommendations

Objectives: There are two potentially useful but nonintersecting efforts to ensure that psychological science is valid and credible, and helps understand the diversity of human experiences. Whereas American ethnic minority psychology/cultural diversity (EM/D) research focuses on culturally competent, contextual psychological understanding of understudied and underserved populations, current open science (OS) approaches emphasize material and data sharing, and statistical proficiency to maximize replicability of mainstream findings. Three studies illuminated the extent and reasons for this bifurcation, and OS’s potential impact on EM/D research. Methods and Results: In Study 1, we reviewed the editorial/publishing policies and articles appearing in four major EM/D journals on the degrees of support for and use of OS. Journals varied in policies; 32 of 823 empirical articles incorporated any OS practices. Study 2 was a national mixed methods survey of EM/D researchers’ (N=141) and journal editors’ (N=15) views about and use of OS practices. Editors were more familiar with and accepting of OS practices than researchers. Themes emerged about the perceived impact of OS on scientific quality, possible professional disadvantages for EM/D researchers, and concerns about the welfare of and ethical risks posed for participants of color. In Study 3, we explored research participants’ beliefs about data sharing and the credibility of science/scientists (N=1,104). Participants reported accepting attitudes toward OS-recommended data sharing, and favorable views about psychological science. Conclusions: We provide data-driven recommendations for all researchers to assemble the best tools for engaging in culturally competent and transparent research and in generating valid and useful knowledge.