不是你的“典型”研究:神经多样性学术中的包容伦理

IF 3.5 2区 生物学 Q2 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
Liana Bernard, Stefanie Fox, Kay Kulason, Alex Phanphackdy, Xander Kahle, Larry R. Martinez, Ludmila N. Praslova, Nicholas A. Smith
{"title":"不是你的“典型”研究:神经多样性学术中的包容伦理","authors":"Liana Bernard, Stefanie Fox, Kay Kulason, Alex Phanphackdy, Xander Kahle, Larry R. Martinez, Ludmila N. Praslova, Nicholas A. Smith","doi":"10.1017/iop.2022.100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research focusing on neurodiversity1 is critical for including all marginalized populations in the organizational diversity literature and for promoting theoretical innovation. It is imperative that such research models the ethics of inclusion (Gowen et al., 2019; Nicolaidis et al., 2019). Despite positive intent, majority group researchers have historically produced biased scholarship on novel marginalized populations (Colella et al., 2017). As all research includes some subjective bias, neurotypical researchers are likely to publish information that further marginalizes neurodivergent2 people as they inherently do not have the lived experience of being neurodivergent themselves. Researchers should include the perspectives of the members of the populations they are conducting research on and aim to support neurodivergent voices. We recommend that researchers (a) include neurodivergent research team members3 when researching neurodiversity and (b) strengthen the marginalized participant impact on research findings through methods like qualitative and participatory action research, especially if including neurodivergent research team members is not feasible despite legitimate attempts to do so.","PeriodicalId":11,"journal":{"name":"ACS Chemical Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Not your “typical” research: Inclusion ethics in neurodiversity scholarship\",\"authors\":\"Liana Bernard, Stefanie Fox, Kay Kulason, Alex Phanphackdy, Xander Kahle, Larry R. Martinez, Ludmila N. Praslova, Nicholas A. Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/iop.2022.100\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Research focusing on neurodiversity1 is critical for including all marginalized populations in the organizational diversity literature and for promoting theoretical innovation. It is imperative that such research models the ethics of inclusion (Gowen et al., 2019; Nicolaidis et al., 2019). Despite positive intent, majority group researchers have historically produced biased scholarship on novel marginalized populations (Colella et al., 2017). As all research includes some subjective bias, neurotypical researchers are likely to publish information that further marginalizes neurodivergent2 people as they inherently do not have the lived experience of being neurodivergent themselves. Researchers should include the perspectives of the members of the populations they are conducting research on and aim to support neurodivergent voices. We recommend that researchers (a) include neurodivergent research team members3 when researching neurodiversity and (b) strengthen the marginalized participant impact on research findings through methods like qualitative and participatory action research, especially if including neurodivergent research team members is not feasible despite legitimate attempts to do so.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Chemical Biology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Chemical Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.100\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Chemical Biology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2022.100","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关注神经多样性的研究1对于将所有边缘化人群纳入组织多样性文献和促进理论创新至关重要。这类研究必须为包容性的伦理建模(Gowen等人,2019;Nicolaidis等人,2019)。尽管有积极的意图,但大多数群体的研究人员在历史上对新型边缘化人群产生了偏见(Colella et al.,2017)。由于所有研究都包含一些主观偏见,神经典型研究人员可能会发布进一步边缘化神经分化者2的信息,因为他们本身就没有神经分化的生活经历。研究人员应该包括他们正在进行研究的人群成员的观点,并旨在支持神经分歧的声音。我们建议研究人员(a)在研究神经多样性时,包括神经发散性研究团队成员3;(b)通过定性和参与性行动研究等方法,加强边缘化参与者对研究结果的影响,特别是在尽管有合法尝试,但包括神经发散研究团队成员是不可行的情况下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Not your “typical” research: Inclusion ethics in neurodiversity scholarship
Research focusing on neurodiversity1 is critical for including all marginalized populations in the organizational diversity literature and for promoting theoretical innovation. It is imperative that such research models the ethics of inclusion (Gowen et al., 2019; Nicolaidis et al., 2019). Despite positive intent, majority group researchers have historically produced biased scholarship on novel marginalized populations (Colella et al., 2017). As all research includes some subjective bias, neurotypical researchers are likely to publish information that further marginalizes neurodivergent2 people as they inherently do not have the lived experience of being neurodivergent themselves. Researchers should include the perspectives of the members of the populations they are conducting research on and aim to support neurodivergent voices. We recommend that researchers (a) include neurodivergent research team members3 when researching neurodiversity and (b) strengthen the marginalized participant impact on research findings through methods like qualitative and participatory action research, especially if including neurodivergent research team members is not feasible despite legitimate attempts to do so.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Chemical Biology
ACS Chemical Biology 生物-生化与分子生物学
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
5.00%
发文量
353
审稿时长
3.3 months
期刊介绍: ACS Chemical Biology provides an international forum for the rapid communication of research that broadly embraces the interface between chemistry and biology. The journal also serves as a forum to facilitate the communication between biologists and chemists that will translate into new research opportunities and discoveries. Results will be published in which molecular reasoning has been used to probe questions through in vitro investigations, cell biological methods, or organismic studies. We welcome mechanistic studies on proteins, nucleic acids, sugars, lipids, and nonbiological polymers. The journal serves a large scientific community, exploring cellular function from both chemical and biological perspectives. It is understood that submitted work is based upon original results and has not been published previously.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信