This #PSDiversityandInclusion digital event was our largest to date with 8 posts spread over two weeks that addressed issues relating to diversity and inclusion in the Psychonomic Society and science generally. The following posts, listed in their order of publication, contributed to this event:

• Stephan Lewandowsky kicked off the discussion by underscoring why diversity and inclusion is not just an issue of fairness, but also an important element to enhance the quality of science itself.
• Susanne Quadflieg and Almas Talib talked about the need to diversify our teaching and to move away from a “white syllabus”, again not just because of considerations of fairness and inclusivity but also to avoid ethnocentric biases in our own teaching.
• Wendy Francis addressed the issue of De-WEIRDing our participant samples. Most of our experiments rely on participants from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies, which may have implications for generalizability.
• Valerie Reyna asked whether the current attention on failures to replicate and on questionable research practices might also have a gendered aspect?
• Penny Pexman and Debra Titone provided an in-depth analysis of the “ruptured pipeline” using data from Canada. Why do so many women enter the academic pipeline as undergraduates but then never show up in leading positions?
• Kathy Rastle explained how the United Kingdom seeks to increase the representation of women at senior levels in academia through the Athena Swan program.
• Ivy Defoe, who is a member of the Society’s diversity and inclusion committee, related her own personal experiences trying to address the cultural bias in scientific research.
• Richard Morey revealed how his commitment to diversity and inclusion did not prevent him from organizing an all-male panel. He provided some specific steps that we can all take to avoid such problematic outcomes.