The persistent sampling bias in developmental psychology: A call to action

TLDR: It is shown that high-impact-factor developmental journals are heavily skewed toward publishing articles with data from WEIRD populations, and there is a habitual dependence on convenience sampling and little evidence that the discipline is making any meaningful movement toward drawing from diverse samples.

About: This article is published in Journal of Experimental Child Psychology.The article was published on 2017-10-01 and is currently open access. It has received 523 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Developmental Science & Population.

Figures

Figure 1. Percentages of participant representation in all manuscripts published in Child Development, Developmental Psychology and Developmental Science in 2008 and 2015.

Table 1. Percentages of participant representation in all manuscripts published in Child Development, Developmental Psychology and Developmental Science between 2006 and 2010

Frequently asked questions

Q1. What contributions have the authors mentioned in the paper "The sampling bias in developmental psychology" ?

Nielsen et al. this paper pointed out that the vast majority of the world 's population is underrepresented in high-impact developmental psychology research. 

Q2. What future works have the authors mentioned in the paper "The sampling bias in developmental psychology" ?

If reading in English is challenging, identifying cutting edge research may be elusive, leading to research being done that is outside contemporary trends. The authors must be ever attentive to the possibility that where they think they are exploring human universals they are rather exploring cultural specifics. The authors need to accept the challenge posed by diversity, provide the explanations it requires, and harness this information to build an improved set of encompassing theories about the development of the human mind. Similarly, access to peak journals is expensive and may be beyond the budgets of many of the world ’ s universities. 

Q3. What is the key question for psychologists?

Theoretically driven, empirically falsifiable endeavors that involve participants across a range of environmental circumstances will enrich their understanding of psychology and help clarify the validity of research findings. 

Q4. What are the core elements of optimal parenting?

early childhood development programs are frequently based on sensitivity and mindmindedness (Meins et al., 2002; Slade, 2005) as the core elements of optimal parenting that should be supported. 

Q5. What are the main reasons for the lack of opportunities for research with culturally heterogeneous?

Opportunities for research with culturally heterogeneous samples are typically limited and depend on the commitment of unique, often substantive, temporal and fiscal resources, and sometimes on years investing in building trust among relevant communities with little immediate return. 

Q6. What are the steps forward to encourage the publication of studies that feature non-WEIRD participants?

Positive steps forward include: (1) encouraging publication of studies that feature non-WEIRD participants; (2) encouraging replication in a new population of a previously established finding; and (3) encouraging theoretically-motivated cross-cultural comparisons that examine how children’s cultural environments might impact their development. 

Q7. What are the reasons for the low rejection rates?

papers published in the journals sampled here are held to the highest standards of empirical rigor, and rejection rates are high. 

Q8. What is the main point of the article?

In certain situations the exploration of possibly skewed findings as a result of restrictedparticipant sampling might be redundant, but decisions about this need to be made through a lens of awareness and with appreciation of the potential impact of using homogenous data. 

Q9. What is the main reason for the lack of English in developmental psychology research?

While journals may encourage submission by authors from nonEnglish-speaking backgrounds, and offer to copyedit manuscripts, researchers without sufficientgrasp of English to get to that level are forced to publish in local journals (or not at all).