Implementation of Open Science Practices in Communication Sciences and Disorders Research With Black, Indigenous, and People of Color

Abstract

Purpose: Open science that is truly accessible and transparent to all will enhance reproducibility. However, there are ethical and practical concerns in implementing open science practices, especially when working with populations who are systematically excluded from and marginalized in communication sciences and disorders (CSD) research, such as Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) from clinical populations. The purpose of this article was to discuss these concerns and present actionable steps to support open science in CSD research with BIPOC. Conclusions: In the movement toward open and reproducible science, the discipline of CSD must prioritize accessibility and transparency, in addition to the implementation of individual scientific practices. Such a focus requires building trust with BIPOC not only as research participants but also as valued leaders of the scientific community.

Community, Equity, and Cultural Change in Open Research: A Response to Open Peer Commentaries

“…Nagle states that through open research, teams of researchers can work together "to collect, aggregate, and analyze data, yielding findings that are more inclusive and representative of the diverse populations." Girolama et al recognize the potential of open research to advance equity in our field, but they also argue that this will not happen without proactive planning (see Girolama et al, 2023, for With open access being one of the most pressing issues in regard to equity, we highlight Al Hoorie and Hiver's commentary on the postprint pledge, as one open research practice that provides free and equitable access to research (see also Marsden & Morgan-Short Appendix, pp. 17-18).…”

“…Nagle states that through open research, teams of researchers can work together “to collect, aggregate, and analyze data, yielding findings that are more inclusive and representative of the diverse populations.” Girolama et al. recognize the potential of open research to advance equity in our field, but they also argue that this will not happen without proactive planning (see Girolama et al., 2023, for an example of this work with BIPOC [Black, Indigenous, and People of Color] from clinical populations). Steinhardt et al.…”

Studies pertaining to language impairment in school-age autistic individuals underreport participant socio-demographics: A systematic review

“…Most importantly, reporting should avoid treating "white" as the default against which other categories are compared; instead, we should aim to report all racial and ethnic categories and their intersection with race and ethnicity. Of course, researchers must balance reporting needs with concerns for participant privacy, as providing highly specific information about participants in a small sample or a low-incidence population risks identification (Girolamo, Castro et al, 2022). Reporting guidelines for the AMA and APA underline the importance of precision in describing race or ethnicity, while guidelines for the NIH do not.…”

“…Thus, even when researchers make good faith attempts to be inclusive, samples may be less diverse than is warranted by the population base. The convenience and success rates of less diverse samples further reify researcher assumptions about who is a "good" participant; together with underreporting, such assumptions can amplify the vicious cycle of who is identified as a prospective research participant (Girolamo, Castro et al, 2022).…”

A community-based approach to longitudinal language research with racially & ethnically minoritized autistic young adults: Lessons learned and new directions

“…The first author contacted potential participants and their caregivers to provide a personalized consultation about the study using their preferred communication modality and at their preferred time. The author did not assume any prior research experience or knowledge of research studies, as concepts like confidentiality and privacy have specific meanings that people outside of research do not know (Girolamo et al, 2022a). Rather, the author provided a jargonfree study overview, including detailed explanations of consent, assent, and participant rights.…”