From Puzzle to Progress: How Engaging With Neurodiversity Can Improve Cognitive Science

Manalili, Marie Adrienne Robles; Pearson, Amy; Sulik, Justin; Creechan, Louise; Elsherif, Mahmoud Medhat; Murkumbi, Inika; Bonnen, Kathryn; Kim, Judy Sein; Kording, Konrad; Lee, Julie J.; Obscura, Manifold; Kapp, Steven K.; Röer, Jan Philipp; Morstead, Talia

doi:10.1111/cogs.13255

Cited by 24 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 93 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A study designed this way would lead to a more nuanced perspective, better translations, culture‐specific understanding, and better theories (see Gervais, 2021). This is similar to participatory research, particularly that is conducted in neurodiversity research (Azevedo et al., 2022; Balcazar et al., 2004; Elsherif et al., 2022; Gourdon‐Kanhukamwe et al., 2023; Manalili et al., 2022), in which neurotypical researchers ensure the neurodiverse community is directly included in research. Policy‐making decisions that affect them and can be expressed by the commonly used slogan, ‘Nothing about us without us.’ Put simply, research conducted in the Global South actively needs to include the Global South; otherwise, we are not considering anything important or relevant to the community.…”

Section: Practical Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 86%

Guidelines to improve internationalization in the psychological sciences

Puthillam

Doble

Santos

et al. 2023

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conversations about the internationalization of psychological sciences have occurred over a few decades with very little progress. Previous work shows up to 95% of participants in the studies published in mainstream journals are from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic nations. Similarly, a large proportion of authors are based in North America. This imbalance is well‐documented across a range of subfields in psychology, yet the specific steps and best practices to bridge publication and data gaps across world regions are still unclear. To address this issue, we conducted a hackathon at the Society for the Improvement of Psychological Science 2021 conference to develop guidelines to improve international representation of authors and participants, adapted for various stakeholders in the production of psychological knowledge. Based on this hackathon, we discuss specific guidelines and practices that funding bodies, academic institutions, professional academic societies, journal editors and reviewers, and researchers should engage with to ensure psychology is the scientific discipline of human behavior and cognition across the world. These recommendations will help us develop a more valid and fairer science of human sociality.

show abstract

Section: Practical Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 86%

Guidelines to improve internationalization in the psychological sciences

Puthillam

Doble

Santos

et al. 2023

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is a long history, outside of mainstream psychological research, of pushing back against generalizing and normalizing from homogeneous participant groups. Important work questioning normativity can be found in Black psychology (Boykin, 1977), deaf and disability studies (Canagarajah, 2022), cultural psychology (Rogoff, 2003), neurodiversity (Manalili et al, 2023), sociocultural psychology (Bronfenbrenner, 1977; Spencer et al, 1997; Vygotskiĭ, 1978), language development (Figueroa, 2023), feminist psychology (Pitts-Taylor, 2019), education (Joseph et al, 2019; Martin, 2019), and recent cognitive sciences (Prather, 2021; Thomas et al, 2023; Zhang et al, 2023).…”

Section: What Does a Critical Approach Mean For Generalization?mentioning

confidence: 99%

A new path: Why we need critical approaches to cognitive and psychological sciences.

Prather¹

2023

Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The issue of generalizability in psychological and cognitive sciences is best understood in the broader context and history of the disciplines and human research in general. Interrelated issues around the use of normativity in supporting hierarchical (e.g., White supremacist) views of humanity demonstrate the need for the discipline to reconsider currently accepted ways of doing things. Bauer (2023) contributes to this needed discussion by focusing on the seemingly intractable problem of dealing with generalization in psychological research. In the current piece, I pick up on Bauer's suggestion of a new path for the discipline and outline a framework for a critical approach to psychological and cognitive sciences. This broad approach represents an alternative way forward for researchers in our understanding of how normativity and generalization interact with our work. A critical approach also necessitates a reevaluation of our current characterization of humans' cognitive and psychological processes.

show abstract

“…It is fine for non‐dyslexic people to research dyslexia, but dyslexia research should be done in collaboration with the dyslexic community. Research is best conducted as a collaborative team (Hall et al, 2018; Patton Terry et al, 2021), and enhanced when those research teams are neurodiverse in membership (Gourdon‐Kanhukamwe et al, 2023; Manalili et al, 2023). The field of dyslexia research needs to move towards actively forming research partnerships with dyslexic people.…”

Section: A Solution: Research Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dyslexia is not a gift, but it is not that simple

Johnson

2023

Infant and Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been relentless debate as to whether dyslexia is a gift, and specifically, if dyslexics are more creative than the average person, despite established research evidence that there is no difference in creativity between those with and without dyslexia. With this paper, I outline that this conversation is not that simple, and one must consider society's view of disability and the developmental experience of growing up in a society that devalues dyslexic people. I conclude by positing that while dyslexia is not a gift, it is a part of neurodiversity.Highlights This paper describes the nuances as to why, while dyslexia is not a gift, it is not that simple. As dyslexics develop, they exist within an ableist society that devalues people who are struggling readers, disabled, and neurodivergent. Dyslexia does not need to come with special gifts in order for dyslexics to hold value in society. Dyslexics are part of neurodiversity, and neurodiversity is valued.

show abstract

From Puzzle to Progress: How Engaging With Neurodiversity Can Improve Cognitive Science

Cited by 24 publications

References 93 publications

Guidelines to improve internationalization in the psychological sciences

Guidelines to improve internationalization in the psychological sciences

A new path: Why we need critical approaches to cognitive and psychological sciences.

Dyslexia is not a gift, but it is not that simple

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About