Suppr超能文献

回击学术心理学中的微侵犯反击:对概念蔓延悖论的反思

Pushing Back Against the Microaggression Pushback in Academic Psychology: Reflections on a Concept-Creep Paradox.

作者信息

Hodson Gordon

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Brock University.

出版信息

Perspect Psychol Sci. 2021 Sep;16(5):932-955. doi: 10.1177/1745691621991863.

Abstract

Echoing the 1960s, the 2020s opened with racial tensions boiling. The Black Lives Matter movement is energized, issuing pleas to listen to Black voices regarding day-to-day discrimination and expressing frustrations over the slow progress of social justice. However, psychological scientists have published only several opinion pieces on racial microaggressions, primarily objections, and strikingly little empirical data. Here I document three trends in psychology that coincide with the academic pushback against microaggressions: concept-creep concerns, especially those regarding expanded notions of harm; the expansion of right-leaning values in moral judgments (moral foundations theory); and an emphasis on , with the political left deemed equivalently biased against right-leaning targets (e.g., the rich, police) as the right is against left-leaning targets (e.g., Black people, women, LGBT+ people). Psychological scientists have ignored power dynamics and have strayed from their mission to understand and combat prejudice against disadvantaged populations, rendering researchers distracted and ill-equipped to tackle the microaggression concept. An apparent , with calls to both reduce (e.g., harm) and expand (e.g., liberal prejudices, conservative moral foundations) concepts, poses a serious challenge to research on prejudice. I discuss the need for psychology to better capture Black experiences and to "tell it like it is" or risk becoming an irrelevant discipline of study.

摘要

与20世纪60年代类似,21世纪20年代伊始,种族紧张局势就不断升温。“黑人的命也是命”运动势头正劲,呼吁倾听黑人关于日常歧视的声音,并对社会正义进展缓慢表达不满。然而,心理科学家仅发表了几篇关于种族微侵犯的评论文章,主要是反对意见,而且实证数据极少。在此,我记录了心理学领域与学术界对微侵犯的抵制相契合的三个趋势:概念蔓延问题,尤其是那些关于伤害概念扩展的问题;道德判断中右倾价值观的扩展(道德基础理论);以及对[此处原文缺失内容]的强调,即认为政治左派与右派一样,对右倾目标(如富人、警察)存在偏见,就如同右派对左倾目标(如黑人、女性、LGBT+群体)存在偏见一样。心理科学家忽视了权力动态,偏离了理解和打击对弱势群体偏见的使命,致使研究人员分心且无力应对微侵犯概念。一种明显的[此处原文缺失内容],既要求减少(如伤害)概念,又要求扩展(如自由主义偏见、保守主义道德基础)概念,这对偏见研究构成了严峻挑战。我讨论了心理学更好地捕捉黑人经历并“如实讲述”的必要性,否则可能会成为一门无关紧要的学科。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验