Department of Psychology, University of Oregon.
Department of Psychology, Fordham University.
Am Psychol. 2016 Dec;71(9):892-893. doi: 10.1037/amp0000124.
In their comments on Hall, Yip, and Zárate (2016), Dvorakova (2016) addresses cultural psychology methods and Yakushko, Hoffman, Consoli, and Lee (2016) address qualitative research methods. We provide evidence of the neglect of underrepresented groups in the publications of major journals in cultural psychology and qualitative psychology. We do not view any particular research method as inherently contributing to "epistemological violence" (Yakushko et al., 2016, p. 5), but it is the misguided application and/or interpretation of data generated from such methods that perpetuate oppression. We contend that best practices for representing ethnocultural diversity in research will require a diverse toolbox containing quantitative, qualitative, biological, and behavioral approaches. (PsycINFO Database Record
在他们对 Hall、Yip 和 Zárate（2016）的评论中，Dvorakova（2016）讨论了文化心理学方法，而 Yakushko、Hoffman、Consoli 和 Lee（2016）则讨论了定性研究方法。我们提供了主要文化心理学和定性心理学期刊出版物中代表性不足群体被忽视的证据。我们并不认为任何特定的研究方法本质上会导致“认识论暴力”（Yakushko 等人，2016，第 5 页），但正是这些方法产生的数据的错误应用和/或解释导致了压迫的持续存在。我们认为，在研究中代表民族文化多样性的最佳实践将需要一个多样化的工具包，其中包含定量、定性、生物和行为方法。（PsycINFO 数据库记录
