I’m part of a lot of conversations about how to recruit and train more BIPOC grad students. We usually focus on concrete steps around recruitment strategies, bridge programs, outreach, diversifying our faculty, etc. All of these are important. But … 1/

… if we’re really serious about this we need to think about what experimental psychology has to offer BIPOC grad students. Even when we are "welcoming," it is into a discipline in which the study of “human” behavior centers Whiteness. 2/

We ask them to learn Eurocentric theories, to read work by mostly White authors, to recruit WHITE PARTICIPANTS. Very little about the work itself centers BIPOC people or their experiences. 3/

I’m nowhere near the first person to say this, but I want to name how these practices are explicitly connected to grad student recruitment and success. We are asking BIPOC grads to accept socialization into a discipline that doesn’t fully recognize them. 4/

For example, I was required to read Gordon Allport, Erving Goffman and Henri Tajfel to get my PhD. There was a test. No one required me to read Patricia Hill Collins, Kimberlé Crenshaw, or bell hooks. No one even suggested that I expose myself to Black feminist thought. 5/

Some will say, "I study 'basic' cognitive processes. Why does it matter who my participants are, what readings I assign, what my theory is?” There is A LOT to unpack in such a response. My short answer is that challenging our biases always makes science better. 6/

More to the point of this thread, imagine what re-thinking how we do our work will signal to BIPOC grad students. If we are serious about recruiting, retaining and supporting more diverse cohorts of grads, this needs to be part of the conversation. /END.