Intersectionality in Quantitative Psychological Research: I. Theoretical and Epistemological Issues

Psychology of Women Quarterly

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 155-170

  Else Quest, Nicole M ^a   Hyde, Janet Shibley ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

epistemology; feminist methods; human sex differences; intersectionality; power; quantitative methods; racial and ethnic differences

Indexed keywords

CONTROLLED STUDY; CRITICAL THEORY; EPISTEMOLOGY; ETHNIC DIFFERENCE; FEMALE; FEMINISM; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LIQUID; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE STUDY; RECOGNITION; SCIENTIST; SEX DIFFERENCE; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; THEORETICAL MODEL;

EID: 84969851242     PISSN: 03616843     EISSN: 14716402     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0361684316629797     Document Type: Note

References (84)

1. N.G.Alexander-Floyd (2012). Disappearing acts: Reclaiming intersectionality in the social sciences in a post-Black feminist era. Feminist Formations, 24, 1–25. doi:10.1353/ff.2012.0003
2. G.W.Allport (1954). The nature of prejudice. Oxford, England: Addison Wesley.
3. J.J.Arnett (2008). The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs to become less American. American Psychologist, 63, 602–614. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.7.602
4. L.C.BallR.A.CribbieJ.R.Steele (2013). Beyond gender differences: Using tests of equivalence to evaluate gender similarities. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37, 147–154. doi:10.1177/0361684313480483
5. F.Beale (1970). Double jeopardy: To be Black and female. In (Ed.), The Black woman: An anthology (pp. 90–100). New York, NY: New American Library.
6. S.L.Bem (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex-typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354–364.
7. S.L.Bem (1993). Lenses of gender: Transforming the debate on sexual inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
8. M.T.BergerK.Guidroz (2009). The intersectional approach: Transforming the academy through race, class, & gender. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
9. P.BergerT.Luckmann (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
10. L.Bowleg (2008). When Black + lesbian + woman ≠ Black lesbian woman: The methodological challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality research. Sex Roles, 59, 312–325. doi:10.1007/s11199- 008-9400-z
11. D.W.Carbado (2013). Colorblind intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38, 811–845. doi:10.1086/669666
12. K.A.CaseJ.IuzziniM.Hopkins (2012). Systems of privilege: Intersections, awareness, and applications. Journal of Social Issues, 68, 1–10. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01732.x
13. S.ChoK.W.CrenshawL.McCall (2013). Toward a field of intersectionality studies: Theory, applications, and praxis. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38, 785–810. doi:10.1086/669608
14. H.Y.ChooM.M.Ferree (2010). Practicing intersectionality in sociological research: A critical analysis of inclusions, interactions, and institutions in the study of inequalities. Sociological Theory, 28, 129–149. doi:10.1111/j.1467- 9558.2010.01370.x
15. E.R.Cole (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist, 64, 170–180. doi:10.1037/a0014564
16. P.H.Collins (2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
17. P.H.Collins (2001). Defining Black feminist thought. In (Eds.), Race critical theories: Text and context (pp. 152–175). New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.
18. Combahee River Collective. (1982). A Black feminist statement. In G.T.HullP.B.ScottB.Smith (Eds.), All the women are White, all the Blacks are men, but some of us are brave (pp. 13–22). Old Westbury, NY: The Feminist Press.
19. K.Crenshaw (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 140, 139–167.
20. K.Crenshaw (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241–1299. doi:10.2307/1229039
21. G.H.CuadrazL.Uttal (1999). Intersectionality and in-depth interviews: Methodological strategies for analyzing race, class, and gender. Race, Gender & Class, 6, 156–186.
22. K.Davis (2008). Intersectionality as buzzword: A sociology of science perspective on what makes a feminist theory successful. Feminist Theory, 9, 67–85. doi:10.1177/1464700108086364
23. J.D.DeLamaterJ.S.Hyde (1998). Essentialism vs. social constructionism in the study of human sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 35, 10–18. doi:10.1080/00224499809551913
24. L.M.Diamond (2005). A new view of lesbian subtypes: Stable versus fluid identity trajectories over an 8-year-period. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 119–128. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00174.x
25. L.M.Diamond (2008). Female bisexuality from adolescence to adulthood: Results from a 10-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 44, 5–14. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.44.1.5
26. A.H.EaglyA.EatonS.M.RoseS.RigerM.C.McHugh (2012). Feminism and psychology: Analysis of a half-century of research on women and gender. American Psychologist, 67, 211–230. doi:10.1037/a0027260
27. N.M.Else-QuestJ.S.Hyde (2016). Intersectionality in quantitative psychological research: II. Methods and techniques. Psychology of Women Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/0361684316647953
28. N.M.Else-QuestJ.S.HydeM.C.Linn (2010). Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 103–127. doi:10.1037/a0018053
29. P.Essed (1991). Understanding everyday racism: An interdisciplinary theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
30. M.M.Ferree (2010). Filling the glass: Gender perspectives on families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 420–439. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00711.x
31. A.L.Few-Demo (2014). Intersectionality as the “new” critical approach in feminist family studies: Evolving racial/ethnic feminisms and critical race theories. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 6, 169–183. doi:10.1111/jftr.12039
32. S.T.Fiske (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. American Psychologist, 48, 621–628. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.48.6.621
33. S.T.Fiske (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 357–411). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
34. E.G.GubaY.S.Lincoln (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35. S.Hamby (2009). The gender debate about intimate partner violence: Solutions and dead ends. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 1, 24–34. doi:10.1037/a0015066
36. A.Hancock (2007). When multiplication doesn’t equal quick addition: Examining intersectionality as a research paradigm. Perspectives on Politics, 6, 63–79. doi:10.1017/S1537592707070065
37. D.Haraway (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14, 575–599.
38. S.Harding (1986). The science question in feminism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
39. S.Harding (1987). Introduction: Is there a feminist method? In (Ed.), Feminism & methodology (pp. 1–14). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
40. S.Harding (1998). Is science multicultural? Postcolonialisms, feminisms, and epistemologies. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
41. R.T.Hare-MustinJ.Marecek (1988). The meaning of difference: Gender theory, postmodernism, and psychology. American Psychologist, 43, 455–464. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.43.6.455
42. M.E.Hawkesworth (1989). Knowers, knowing, known: Feminist theory and claims of truth. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 14, 533–557.
43. J.HenrichS.J.HeineA.Norenzayan (2010). The weirdest people in the world?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–135. doi:10.1017/ S0140525X0999152X
44. J.S.Hyde (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60, 581–592. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581
45. J.S.Hyde (2012). Nation-level indicators of gender equity in psychological research: Theoretical and methodological issues. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36, 145–148. doi:10.1177/0361684312441448
46. R.B.JohnsonA.J.Onwuegbuzie (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33, 14–26. doi:10.3102/0013189X033007014
47. E.Kaschak (2013). The mattering map: Integrating the complexities of knowledge, experience, and meaning. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37, 436–443. doi:10.1177/0361684313480839
48. M.Kimmel (2013). Angry White men: American masculinity at the end of an era. New York, NY: Nation Books.
49. J.L.KincheloeP.McLaren (2005). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In (Eds.), Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 303–342). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50. J.LightdaleD.A.Prentice (1994). Rethinking sex differences in aggression: Aggressive behavior in the absence of social roles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 34–44. doi:10.1177/0146167294201003
51. V.M.May (2015). Pursuing intersectionality, unsettling dominant imaginaries. New York, NY: Routledge.
52. L.McCall (2001). Complex inequality: Gender, class, and race in the new economy. New York, NY: Routledge.
53. L.McCall (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30, 1771–1800. doi:10.1086/426800
54. M.C.McHughR.D.KoeskeI.H.Frieze (1986). Issues to consider in conducting nonsexist psychological research. American Psychologist, 41, 879–890.
55. N.M.McKinleyJ.S.Hyde (1996). The objectified body consciousness scale: Development and validation. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 181–216. doi:10.1111/j1471-6402.1996.tb00467.x
56. C.T.Mohanty (2003). Feminism without borders: Decolonizing theory, practicing solidarity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
57. L.Nader (1969). Up the anthropologist: Perspectives gained from studying up. In (Ed.), Reinventing anthropology (pp. 285–311). New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
58. N.NnawuleziC.M.Sullivan (2014). Oppression within safe spaces: Exploring the presence of racial microaggressions within domestic violence shelters. Journal of Black Psychology, 40, 563–591. doi:10.1177/0095798413500072
59. L.T.O’BrienA.BlodornG.AdamsD.M.GarciaE.Hammer (2015). Ethnic variation in gender-STEM stereotypes and STEM participation: An intersectional approach. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21, 169–180. doi:10.1037/a0037944
60. M.C.ParentC.DeBlaereB.Moradi (2013). Approaches to research on intersectionality: Perspectives on gender, LGBT, and racial/ethnic identities. Sex Roles, 68, 639–645. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0283-2
61. C.J.Pascoe (2007). “Dude, you’re a fag”: Masculinity and sexuality in high school. Berkeley: University of California Press.
62. A.M.PennerA.Saperstein (2008). How social status shapes race. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 19628–19630. doi:10.1073/pnas.0805762105
63. L.A.PeplauE.Conrad (1989). Beyond nonsexist research: The perils of feminist methods in psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13, 379–400.
64. K.Popper (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. New York, NY: Basic Books.
65. V.Purdie-VaughnsR.P.Eibach (2008). Intersectional invisibility: The distinctive advantages and disadvantages of multiple subordinate-group identities. Sex Roles, 59, 377–391. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9424-4
66. S.Riger (1992). Epistemological debates, feminist voices: Science, social values, and the study of women. American Psychologist, 47, 730–740.
67. A.S.RosetteR.W.Livingston (2012). Failure is not an option for Black women: Effects of organizational performance on leaders with single versus dual-subordinate identities. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1162–1167. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.05.002
68. A.K.SeskoM.Biernat (2010). Prototypes of race and gender: The invisibility of Black women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 356–360. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.10.016
69. I.H.Settles (2006). Use of an intersectional framework to understand Black women’s racial and gender identities. Sex Roles, 54, 589–601. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9029-8
70. S.A.Shields (2008). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 301–311. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9501-8
71. T.Sloan (2009). Doing theory. In (Eds.), Critical psychology: An introduction (pp. 319–334). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
72. E.Spelman (1988). Inessential woman: Problems of exclusion in feminist thought. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
73. N.Spierings (2012). The inclusion of quantitative techniques and diversity in the mainstream of feminist research. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 19, 331–347. doi:10.1177/1350506812443621
74. J.Sprague (2001). Structured knowledges and strategic methodologies: Comment on Walby’s “Against epistemological chasms: The science question in feminism revisited.”Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 26, 527–536.
75. J.Sprague (2005). Feminist methodologies for critical researchers: Bridging differences. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
76. A.J.StewartC.McDermott (2004). Gender in psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 519–544. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141537
77. M.A.Straus (2008). Dominance and symmetry in partner violence by male and female university students in 32 nations. Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 252–275. doi:1016/j.childyouth.2007.10.004
78. M.Syed (2010). Disciplinarity and methodology in intersectionality theory and research. American Psychologist, 65, 61–62. doi:10.1037/a0017495
79. S.WalbyJ.ArmstrongS.Strid (2012). Intersectionality: Multiple inequalities in social theory. Sociology, 46, 224–240. doi:10.1177/0038038511416164
80. L.R.Warner (2008). A best practices guide to intersectional approaches in psychological research. Sex Roles, 59, 454–463. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9504-5
81. L.R.WarnerS.A.Shields (2013). The intersections of sexuality, gender, and race: Identity research at the crossroads. Sex Roles, 68, 803–810. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0281-4
82. P.Watzlawick (1984). The invented reality: Contributions to constructivism. New York, NY: Norton.
83. C.WestD.Zimmerman (1987). Doing gender. Gender and Society, 1, 125–151.
84. M.A.Wittig (1985). Metatheoretical dilemmas in the psychology of gender. American Psychologist, 40, 800–811.