Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Department of Communication Disorders & Sciences, State University of New York at Buffalo.
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2022 Jul 12;31(4):1898-1912. doi: 10.1044/2022_AJSLP-21-00252. Epub 2022 Jun 27.
The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) has committed to advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) by retaining and advancing Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) individuals in the discipline of communication sciences and disorders (CSD), amid critical shortages of faculty to train the next generation of practitioners and researchers. Publishing research is central to the recruitment, retention, and advancement of faculty. However, inequity in peer review may systematically target BIPOC scholars, adding yet another barrier to their success as faculty. This viewpoint article addresses the challenge of inequity in peer review and provides some practical strategies for developing equitable peer-review practices. First, we describe the demographics of ASHA constituents, including those holding research doctorates, who would typically be involved in peer review. Next, we explore the peer-review process, describing how inequity in peer review may adversely impact BIPOC authors or research with BIPOC communities. Finally, we offer real-world examples of and a framework for equitable peer review.
Inequity at the individual and systemic levels in peer review can harm BIPOC CSD authors. Such inequity has effects not limited to peer review itself and exerts long-term adverse effects on the recruitment, retention, and advancement of BIPOC faculty in CSD. To uphold ASHA's commitment to DEI and to move the discipline of CSD forward, it is imperative to build equity into the editorial structure for publishing, the composition of editorial boards, and journals content. While we focus on inequity in CSD, these issues are relevant to other disciplines.
美国言语-语言-听力协会（ASHA）致力于通过在传播学科学与障碍（CSD）领域留住和提升黑人和原住民以及有色人种（BIPOC）个人来推进多样性、公平性和包容性（DEI），因为在培养下一代从业者和研究人员方面，教师资源严重短缺。发表研究成果对于教师的招聘、留任和晋升至关重要。然而，同行评审中的不公平可能会系统地针对 BIPOC 学者，这给他们作为教师的成功增加了又一个障碍。这篇观点文章探讨了同行评审中不公平的挑战，并提供了一些发展公平同行评审实践的实用策略。首先，我们描述了 ASHA 成员的人口统计数据，包括那些通常参与同行评审的持有研究博士学位的人。接下来，我们探讨了同行评审过程，描述了同行评审中的不公平如何可能对 BIPOC 作者或与 BIPOC 社区相关的研究产生不利影响。最后，我们提供了公平同行评审的实际案例和框架。
同行评审中个人和系统层面的不公平会伤害 CSD 的 BIPOC 作者。这种不公平的影响不仅限于同行评审本身，而且对 CSD 中 BIPOC 教师的招聘、留任和晋升产生长期的不利影响。为了维护 ASHA 对 DEI 的承诺，并推动 CSD 学科的发展，必须将公平性纳入出版的编辑结构、编辑委员会的组成和期刊内容中。虽然我们专注于 CSD 中的不公平问题，但这些问题与其他学科相关。
