2023
DOI: 10.1177/21677026221141655
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Stigmatizing Our Own: Self-Relevant Research (Me-Search) Is Common but Frowned Upon in Clinical Psychological Science

Abstract: How often do clinical psychologists have a lived experience with, or close connection, to their research? Does the field of psychology accept this “me-search”? We undertook the first investigation of self-relevant research (aka “me-search”) and attitudes toward self-relevant researchers in a representative North American sample ( N = 1,776) of faculty, graduate students, and other individuals affiliated with doctoral programs in clinical, counseling, and school psychology. More than 50% of participants had con… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 65 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, as SOGD researchers, we may often have to justify our positionality in relation to our field of study, which may mean thinking through the potential consequences (both positive and negative) of publicly disclosing identities (Veldhuis, 2022). We may also feel more pressure to publish at high volumes and in higher-impact journals, given two factors: (a) the marginalization of ourselves and our research and (b) the work of people who do research among their own communities is often minimized and considered to be “me-search” and not “real science” (Bowleg, 2021; Devendorf, 2022; Devendorf et al, 2023; Gardner et al, 2017; Harris, 2021; Heath, 2015). This is likely to feel different depending on whether and how we identify within the 2SLGBTQIA+ community.…”
Section: Reflexivity Statementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, as SOGD researchers, we may often have to justify our positionality in relation to our field of study, which may mean thinking through the potential consequences (both positive and negative) of publicly disclosing identities (Veldhuis, 2022). We may also feel more pressure to publish at high volumes and in higher-impact journals, given two factors: (a) the marginalization of ourselves and our research and (b) the work of people who do research among their own communities is often minimized and considered to be “me-search” and not “real science” (Bowleg, 2021; Devendorf, 2022; Devendorf et al, 2023; Gardner et al, 2017; Harris, 2021; Heath, 2015). This is likely to feel different depending on whether and how we identify within the 2SLGBTQIA+ community.…”
Section: Reflexivity Statementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But an actual personal attachment to religion is not necessary to be perceived as having one. Studies show we tend to assume people are engaging in some sort of "me-search" (Devendorf et al 2023), and thus, whether someone is religious or not, studying religion may imply as much.…”
Section: Why Do We Neglect Religion?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies show we tend to assume people are engaging in some sort of “me‐search” (Devendorf et al. 2023), and thus, whether someone is religious or not, studying religion may imply as much.…”
Section: Why Do We Neglect Religion?mentioning
confidence: 99%