The Neglected 95% Revisited: Is American Psychology Becoming Less American?

The field of psychology prides itself on being a data-driven science. In 2008, however, Arnett brought to light a major weakness in the evidence on which models, measures, and theories in psychology rest. He demonstrated that the most prominent journals in six subdisciplines of psychology focused al...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The American psychologist 2021-01, Vol.76 (1), p.116-129
Hauptverfasser: Thalmayer, Amber Gayle, Toscanelli, Cecilia, Arnett, Jeffrey Jensen
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 129
container_issue 1
container_start_page 116
container_title The American psychologist
container_volume 76
creator Thalmayer, Amber Gayle
Toscanelli, Cecilia
Arnett, Jeffrey Jensen
description The field of psychology prides itself on being a data-driven science. In 2008, however, Arnett brought to light a major weakness in the evidence on which models, measures, and theories in psychology rest. He demonstrated that the most prominent journals in six subdisciplines of psychology focused almost exclusively (over 70% of samples and authors) on a cultural context, the United States, shared by only 5% of the world's population. How can psychologists trust that these models and results generalize to all humans, if the evidence comes from a small and unrepresentative portion of the global population? Arnett's analysis, cited over 1,300 times since its publication, appears to have galvanized researchers to think more globally. Social scientists from the United States have increasingly sought ways to collaborate with colleagues abroad. Ten years later, an analysis of the same 6 journals for the period of 2014 to 2018 indicates that the authors and samples are now on average a little over 60% American based. The change is mainly due to an increase in authorship and samples from other English-speaking and Western European countries. Thus, it might be said that 11% of the world's population is now represented in these top psychology journals, but that 89% of the world's population continues to be neglected. Majority world authors and samples (4-5%) are still sorely lacking from the evidence base. Psychology still has a long way to go to become a science truly representative of human beings. Several specific recommendations are discussed. Public Significance Statement The field of psychology prides itself on being a data-driven science, but a major weakness in the evidence base has been overreliance on a cultural context, the United States, shared by only 5% of the world's population. In 2008, it was reported that the most prominent journals of six subdisciplines in psychology relied on samples that were over 70% American. Ten years later, an analysis of the same journals indicates that authors and samples are now on average a little over 60% American based, but with the change mainly due to an increase in participation from other English-speaking and Western European countries. Majority-world authors and samples (4-5%) are still sorely lacking from the evidence base.
doi_str_mv 10.1037/amp0000622
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2388002596</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2485545074</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a481t-25a701e69e76629c6daa750025ffb7843c146be4263e839114ce041c1287e963</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp90UlrWzEQB3ARGmI3yaUfoAhKoCS8RvvSS3BNl1CTluCDb0KWx84Lb6v0XsHfPnKcBXqoLmKGH3-GGYTeUfKJEq4vfd2R_BRjB2hMLZeFtWTxBo1zkxdEqcUIvU3pPpfSWHqERpwxTQnTY_Rzfgf4BjYVhB5W2MozfAt_y1Tm6jO-TnhSQyyDb_DvtA13bdVutvgLhLYumw2eQXoVVyfocO2rBKdP_zGaf_s6n_4oZr--X08ns8ILQ_uCSa8JBWVBK8VsUCvvtSSEyfV6qY3ggQq1BMEUB8MtpSIAETRQZjRYxY_Rx31sF9s_A6Te1WUKUFW-gXZIjnFjdmmP9MM_9L4dYpOHc0wYKYUkWvxXcaNNHkfYrM73KsQ2pQhr18Wy9nHrKHG7O7jXO2T8_ilyWNaweqHPi8_gYg98512XV-tjX4YKUhhihKbfhTmtHHWUKv4ALSON9A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2387814649</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Neglected 95% Revisited: Is American Psychology Becoming Less American?</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES</source><creator>Thalmayer, Amber Gayle ; Toscanelli, Cecilia ; Arnett, Jeffrey Jensen</creator><contributor>Cooper, Harris ; Kazak, Anne E</contributor><creatorcontrib>Thalmayer, Amber Gayle ; Toscanelli, Cecilia ; Arnett, Jeffrey Jensen ; Cooper, Harris ; Kazak, Anne E</creatorcontrib><description>The field of psychology prides itself on being a data-driven science. In 2008, however, Arnett brought to light a major weakness in the evidence on which models, measures, and theories in psychology rest. He demonstrated that the most prominent journals in six subdisciplines of psychology focused almost exclusively (over 70% of samples and authors) on a cultural context, the United States, shared by only 5% of the world's population. How can psychologists trust that these models and results generalize to all humans, if the evidence comes from a small and unrepresentative portion of the global population? Arnett's analysis, cited over 1,300 times since its publication, appears to have galvanized researchers to think more globally. Social scientists from the United States have increasingly sought ways to collaborate with colleagues abroad. Ten years later, an analysis of the same 6 journals for the period of 2014 to 2018 indicates that the authors and samples are now on average a little over 60% American based. The change is mainly due to an increase in authorship and samples from other English-speaking and Western European countries. Thus, it might be said that 11% of the world's population is now represented in these top psychology journals, but that 89% of the world's population continues to be neglected. Majority world authors and samples (4-5%) are still sorely lacking from the evidence base. Psychology still has a long way to go to become a science truly representative of human beings. Several specific recommendations are discussed. Public Significance Statement The field of psychology prides itself on being a data-driven science, but a major weakness in the evidence base has been overreliance on a cultural context, the United States, shared by only 5% of the world's population. In 2008, it was reported that the most prominent journals of six subdisciplines in psychology relied on samples that were over 70% American. Ten years later, an analysis of the same journals indicates that authors and samples are now on average a little over 60% American based, but with the change mainly due to an increase in participation from other English-speaking and Western European countries. Majority-world authors and samples (4-5%) are still sorely lacking from the evidence base.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-066X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1935-990X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/amp0000622</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32271027</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Authorship ; Cross Cultural Psychology ; Human ; Majority Groups ; Meta Analysis ; Philosophies ; Population ; Psychologists ; Psychology ; Reporting Standards ; Sciences ; Scientific Communication ; Strength</subject><ispartof>The American psychologist, 2021-01, Vol.76 (1), p.116-129</ispartof><rights>2020 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2020, American Psychological Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Jan 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a481t-25a701e69e76629c6daa750025ffb7843c146be4263e839114ce041c1287e963</citedby><orcidid>0000-0001-8808-3506 ; 0000-0002-1963-1123</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,30976</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32271027$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Cooper, Harris</contributor><contributor>Kazak, Anne E</contributor><creatorcontrib>Thalmayer, Amber Gayle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Toscanelli, Cecilia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arnett, Jeffrey Jensen</creatorcontrib><title>The Neglected 95% Revisited: Is American Psychology Becoming Less American?</title><title>The American psychologist</title><addtitle>Am Psychol</addtitle><description>The field of psychology prides itself on being a data-driven science. In 2008, however, Arnett brought to light a major weakness in the evidence on which models, measures, and theories in psychology rest. He demonstrated that the most prominent journals in six subdisciplines of psychology focused almost exclusively (over 70% of samples and authors) on a cultural context, the United States, shared by only 5% of the world's population. How can psychologists trust that these models and results generalize to all humans, if the evidence comes from a small and unrepresentative portion of the global population? Arnett's analysis, cited over 1,300 times since its publication, appears to have galvanized researchers to think more globally. Social scientists from the United States have increasingly sought ways to collaborate with colleagues abroad. Ten years later, an analysis of the same 6 journals for the period of 2014 to 2018 indicates that the authors and samples are now on average a little over 60% American based. The change is mainly due to an increase in authorship and samples from other English-speaking and Western European countries. Thus, it might be said that 11% of the world's population is now represented in these top psychology journals, but that 89% of the world's population continues to be neglected. Majority world authors and samples (4-5%) are still sorely lacking from the evidence base. Psychology still has a long way to go to become a science truly representative of human beings. Several specific recommendations are discussed. Public Significance Statement The field of psychology prides itself on being a data-driven science, but a major weakness in the evidence base has been overreliance on a cultural context, the United States, shared by only 5% of the world's population. In 2008, it was reported that the most prominent journals of six subdisciplines in psychology relied on samples that were over 70% American. Ten years later, an analysis of the same journals indicates that authors and samples are now on average a little over 60% American based, but with the change mainly due to an increase in participation from other English-speaking and Western European countries. Majority-world authors and samples (4-5%) are still sorely lacking from the evidence base.</description><subject>Authorship</subject><subject>Cross Cultural Psychology</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Majority Groups</subject><subject>Meta Analysis</subject><subject>Philosophies</subject><subject>Population</subject><subject>Psychologists</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Reporting Standards</subject><subject>Sciences</subject><subject>Scientific Communication</subject><subject>Strength</subject><issn>0003-066X</issn><issn>1935-990X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp90UlrWzEQB3ARGmI3yaUfoAhKoCS8RvvSS3BNl1CTluCDb0KWx84Lb6v0XsHfPnKcBXqoLmKGH3-GGYTeUfKJEq4vfd2R_BRjB2hMLZeFtWTxBo1zkxdEqcUIvU3pPpfSWHqERpwxTQnTY_Rzfgf4BjYVhB5W2MozfAt_y1Tm6jO-TnhSQyyDb_DvtA13bdVutvgLhLYumw2eQXoVVyfocO2rBKdP_zGaf_s6n_4oZr--X08ns8ILQ_uCSa8JBWVBK8VsUCvvtSSEyfV6qY3ggQq1BMEUB8MtpSIAETRQZjRYxY_Rx31sF9s_A6Te1WUKUFW-gXZIjnFjdmmP9MM_9L4dYpOHc0wYKYUkWvxXcaNNHkfYrM73KsQ2pQhr18Wy9nHrKHG7O7jXO2T8_ilyWNaweqHPi8_gYg98512XV-tjX4YKUhhihKbfhTmtHHWUKv4ALSON9A</recordid><startdate>202101</startdate><enddate>202101</enddate><creator>Thalmayer, Amber Gayle</creator><creator>Toscanelli, Cecilia</creator><creator>Arnett, Jeffrey Jensen</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8808-3506</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1963-1123</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202101</creationdate><title>The Neglected 95% Revisited: Is American Psychology Becoming Less American?</title><author>Thalmayer, Amber Gayle ; Toscanelli, Cecilia ; Arnett, Jeffrey Jensen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a481t-25a701e69e76629c6daa750025ffb7843c146be4263e839114ce041c1287e963</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Authorship</topic><topic>Cross Cultural Psychology</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Majority Groups</topic><topic>Meta Analysis</topic><topic>Philosophies</topic><topic>Population</topic><topic>Psychologists</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Reporting Standards</topic><topic>Sciences</topic><topic>Scientific Communication</topic><topic>Strength</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Thalmayer, Amber Gayle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Toscanelli, Cecilia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arnett, Jeffrey Jensen</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The American psychologist</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Thalmayer, Amber Gayle</au><au>Toscanelli, Cecilia</au><au>Arnett, Jeffrey Jensen</au><au>Cooper, Harris</au><au>Kazak, Anne E</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Neglected 95% Revisited: Is American Psychology Becoming Less American?</atitle><jtitle>The American psychologist</jtitle><addtitle>Am Psychol</addtitle><date>2021-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>76</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>116</spage><epage>129</epage><pages>116-129</pages><issn>0003-066X</issn><eissn>1935-990X</eissn><abstract>The field of psychology prides itself on being a data-driven science. In 2008, however, Arnett brought to light a major weakness in the evidence on which models, measures, and theories in psychology rest. He demonstrated that the most prominent journals in six subdisciplines of psychology focused almost exclusively (over 70% of samples and authors) on a cultural context, the United States, shared by only 5% of the world's population. How can psychologists trust that these models and results generalize to all humans, if the evidence comes from a small and unrepresentative portion of the global population? Arnett's analysis, cited over 1,300 times since its publication, appears to have galvanized researchers to think more globally. Social scientists from the United States have increasingly sought ways to collaborate with colleagues abroad. Ten years later, an analysis of the same 6 journals for the period of 2014 to 2018 indicates that the authors and samples are now on average a little over 60% American based. The change is mainly due to an increase in authorship and samples from other English-speaking and Western European countries. Thus, it might be said that 11% of the world's population is now represented in these top psychology journals, but that 89% of the world's population continues to be neglected. Majority world authors and samples (4-5%) are still sorely lacking from the evidence base. Psychology still has a long way to go to become a science truly representative of human beings. Several specific recommendations are discussed. Public Significance Statement The field of psychology prides itself on being a data-driven science, but a major weakness in the evidence base has been overreliance on a cultural context, the United States, shared by only 5% of the world's population. In 2008, it was reported that the most prominent journals of six subdisciplines in psychology relied on samples that were over 70% American. Ten years later, an analysis of the same journals indicates that authors and samples are now on average a little over 60% American based, but with the change mainly due to an increase in participation from other English-speaking and Western European countries. Majority-world authors and samples (4-5%) are still sorely lacking from the evidence base.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><pmid>32271027</pmid><doi>10.1037/amp0000622</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8808-3506</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1963-1123</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-066X
ispartof The American psychologist, 2021-01, Vol.76 (1), p.116-129
issn 0003-066X
1935-990X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2388002596
source Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES
subjects Authorship
Cross Cultural Psychology
Human
Majority Groups
Meta Analysis
Philosophies
Population
Psychologists
Psychology
Reporting Standards
Sciences
Scientific Communication
Strength
title The Neglected 95% Revisited: Is American Psychology Becoming Less American?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-13T15%3A24%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Neglected%2095%25%20Revisited:%20Is%20American%20Psychology%20Becoming%20Less%20American?&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20psychologist&rft.au=Thalmayer,%20Amber%20Gayle&rft.date=2021-01&rft.volume=76&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=116&rft.epage=129&rft.pages=116-129&rft.issn=0003-066X&rft.eissn=1935-990X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/amp0000622&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2485545074%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2387814649&rft_id=info:pmid/32271027&rfr_iscdi=true