For the next two weeks, we are running a digital event called “#WeNeedEDI: Striving for equality, diversity, and inclusion throughout academics’ careers.” The event focuses on the experiences of underrepresented academics and potential ways to increase equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) as we go from early-career academics to emeriti. 

The Psychonomic Society “recognizes the strategic and critical importance of a diverse and inclusive climate for the future of the field.” In 2016, the Society assembled a diversity and inclusion committee and is still going strong with 7-members tasked with assuring diversity and inclusion are a priority. Since its inception, the committee launched the following initiatives:

1. Achieve a balanced (gender and underrepresented groups) representation in all aspects of the Society (e.g., awards, governance, keynote speakers, supported symposia, workshops)
2. Host a diversity and inclusion networking reception during Annual Meetings
3. Create a student diversity travel awards for students from underrepresented groups

The Society is making progress toward the first initiative and met the latter two initiatives. For 6 years, J. Frank Yates Student Travel Awards supported travel for a considerable number of awardees. And you may have been an attendee in Montréal, Québec, Canada, at the Society’s Diversity & Inclusion networking reception at the 2019 Annual Meeting. The picture below shows a large room jammed with Psychonomic Society members, reflecting your dedication to increasing EDI.

Another show of the Society’s commitment to EDI was running a related event in 2018 called “#PSDiversityandInclusion: A digital event discussing issues of diversity and inclusion.” The eight posts covered a wide range of issues, including the “ruptured pipeline” (about fewer women in higher positions in our field despite the large numbers of women studying psychology as undergraduates), the need to move away from color-blind teaching, the importance of diversifying our participant samples, along with many other posts.

We focus this digital event on the experiences of underrepresented academics and potential solutions to increase equality, diversity, and inclusion in our field. Many of the contributors’ solutions are aimed at the individual, meaning change can start today with each of us. We have a long way to go, but with continued conversations, actions, and measures of successes (and failures), we can move ever closer to the goal. Each contributor(s) wrote a post that we will release each day from today until September 1, 2022.

Cynthia Siew starts us off by discussing the memory processes involved in social search and recall and how known biases in how we search our memories may reproduce inequality in academic opportunities. Think about who you last invited for a talk. Did you ask the first couple of academics who sprung to mind? If the lab research generalizes, you probably did. Dr. Siew challenges us to fight that inclination and search deeper. She also encourages broadening our social networks so our initial thoughts will be more diverse. Read the post.

Candace Lapan shares her experiences as LGBTQ+ inside the ivory tower and the surrounding town. She bemoans the lack of accurate data on LGBTQ+ representation in academia. Where are these data? She also describes her experiences finding a campus welcoming to LGBTQ+ faculty – her experience is that universities aren’t the “liberal havens” they’ve been dubbed. She also talks openly about the additional emotional labor that comes from being one of the few “out” faculty members on campus. She expresses ways academics can help by being vocal in support of LGBTQ+ students and colleagues and not tolerating intolerance. Read the post.

Next, Autumn Kujawa and colleagues discuss their recent successful EDI-focused cluster hire and offer tips for search committees looking to implement similar initiatives. The key points are to be intentional in decisions, transparent to the candidates, and above all else, kind. They ask you to try to be the search committee member you wish you had interacted with when you were a candidate. Sometimes the common-sense, thoughtful approach is the right one. Read the post. 

Having just landed a tenure-track job, Cristina Zepeda shares her experiences as an early career academic and thoughts on how search committees can be more inclusive and equitable in their approaches. Dr. Zepeda also discusses the strength she found in forming a supportive network of early career researchers undergoing the same experiences. She makes a call directly to the Society: “I urge societies, like Psychonomic Society, to build and support graduate and postdoc committees, so structures are in place to help form those relationships and spread that knowledge.” Governing Board members, are you listening? Read the post.

Next, Kira McCabe discusses her experiences as a disabled academic and the additional burdens placed on people with disabilities in the academy. She highlights that our current increasing standards for early-career researchers make it extremely difficult for disabled academics to remain in academic positions. We were especially struck by her analysis suggesting that while disabled academics are underrepresented in all stages of academia – most of our current disabled faculty are ones who have become disabled after tenure rather than earlier in life. Read the post.

The founders of the SPARK Society discuss the benefits of open science and the unequal costs it can create for underrepresented scholars. They challenge readers to remember the social context influencing decisions around data-sharing, participant consent, and participant trust. Open science has led to many important improvements in our field, but not all recommendations can be universally applied. Read the post.

Margaret Echelbarger discusses the challenges of graduate school finances and the hidden costs of getting a graduate degree. She encourages faculty to recognize the financial barriers associated with applying for and attending graduate programs and to advocate for increased transparency and improved systems. While the post focuses on US institutions, similar issues occur in all academic systems. Dr. Echelbarger encourages faculty to be aware of how finances affect both applicants and current graduate students. Read the post.

Finally, Christie Chung discusses the current lack of diversity in academic leadership. She provides four essential steps for increasing equity in academia: genuine mentorship and sponsorship, crediting the invisible labor of women and BIPOC individuals, careful examination of our hiring, tenure, and promotion practices, and reimagining the publication process. Read the post.

We thank our contributors for sharing their experiences and proposals for solutions. If you have additional thoughts or suggestions, please let us know. We recognize that many posts are from US-based contributors, so we’d especially like to hear from Psychonomic Society members in other countries about your challenges and solutions. We would also like to hear if you have tried any of these potential solutions, if they were successful, and how you measured success. Contact us, and we will consider extending this Digital Event. Read the post.