Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training,
Research, Practice, and Organizational Change for Psychologists
American Psychological Association
Approved as APA Policy by the APA Council of Representatives, August, 2002
Research
Guideline #4: Culturally sensitive psychological researchers are encouraged to
recognize the importance of conducting culture–centered and ethical psychological
research among persons from ethnic, linguistic, and racial minority backgrounds.
Major demographic shifts in the United States (noted earlier) are underway.
These population shifts have resulted in different constituencies for which new and
expanded psychological research will be necessary. The aging baby boomers, new
immigrants particularly from China, India, Mexico, and the Philippines, younger
individuals of Latino heritage (Judy & D'Amico, 1997), and the growing biracial
populations will likely require new research agendas (Ory, Lipman, Barr, Harden, &
Stahl, 2000). Additionally, according to the U.S. Census Bureau (2001), a greater share
of Americans speak a language other than English at home (27 million speak Spanish, 1
million or more speak Chinese, French, German, Tagalog, Vienamese, Korean, and
Italian). Expanding age, cultural and linguistic diversity, just as three examples, have
implications for research in a wide variety of psychological specialty areas, including, but
not limited to, developmental, gender, health, school, clinical, counseling, and
organizational aspects of psychology.
The treatment of culture in psychological research has shifted in the past century
from ignoring cultural variables to treating culture as a nuisance variable. Thus, for
example, early research participants were White males, yet the results were assumed to
generalize to the entire population. Feminists began to call attention to this, and to decry
the bias inherent in this practice (Grady, 1981; Keller, 1982; Sherif, 1979) as did early
multicultural researchers (Katz, 1985; Korchin, 1980; Sue & Sue, 1977; Triandis &
Brislin, 1984). Both groups questioned the practice of using White middle class males to
define normal behavior, and that all behavior that differed from White norms was either
described as deviant or less desirable. The result was a movement to incorporate gender
and ethnicity/race in research studies as a nuisance variable, rather than as a central
contextual variable that helps to explain human behavior. Compounding this practice was
failure to consider within–group differences of an ethnic minority group, such as regional
differences, socioeconomic status, education, and national origin, e.g., Blacks who may
have come from Africa, Haiti, or the United States, voluntary or involuntary. The
fundamental problem remained that when research does not adequately incorporate
culture as a central and specific contextual variable, behavior is misidentified,
pathologized, and, in some cases, psychologists are at risk of perpetuating harm (Hall,
2001; Rogler, 1999; Sue et al., 1998; Sue & Sue, 1999). As an example, Kwan (1999)
found in a study of the comparison of the MMPI in China and the United States, that on
some MMPI scales, Chinese subjects' scores were elevated relative to the norms in the
United States. Not incorporating a culture–centered perspective might lead a researcher
to conclude a high level of psychopathology in the Chinese sample. Kwan questioned,
however, whether the elevated scales may have been the result of cultural influences,
which would lead to a different conclusion for this study, and one presumes, in treatment
based on the test scores. As another example, Reid (2002) noted the decades of
conclusions about women's and racial/ethnic minority students' lack of educational
attainment from research studies that focused on the students' lack of individual
achievement rather than in social disadvantage. Again, using a culture–centered perspective would lead to different conclusions in these studies, as well as in the
application of this research in school systems and college admissions.
A number of scholars have voiced concerns about the cultural limitations of
psychological research in the United States. First, as noted above, when human behavior
is viewed as individualistically determined, culture is viewed as a nuisance variable Ð
something to be controlled and statistically manipulated rather than a central explanatory
variable (Perez, 1999; Quintana et al., 2001). Second, although scholars began to heed
the call for culturally diverse samples in research, many research samples continue to be
predominantly White and middle class with People of Color underrepresented in these
samples. When the samples are racially diverse, they are much more likely to be samples
of convenience, which may not be representative of the target group, such as samples of
college students representing all Asian Americans. This affects the external validity of a
study, or to whom the findings may be generalized (Fuertes, Bartolomeo, & Nichols,
2001; Sue, 1999). Sue (1999) suggests that psychological science has ignored external
validity problems, and that we have erred in the direction of inaccurately generalizing
from findings based on small subsets of people to the population at large.
A third concern is that all People of Color are presumed to be similar, and, as
discussed in Guideline #1, large within–group differences are ignored (Fouad & Brown,
2000; Quintana et al., 2001). In fact, the CNPAAEMI (2001) Guidelines for Research in
Ethnic Minority Communities (2000) describes the great within–group heterogeneity of
all the major racial/ethnic groups in the United States, as does the Surgeon General's
Report on race, culture and mental health (USDHHS, 2000; 2001). Indeed using only
African Americans from the southern United States and generalizing from this sample to all African Americans would raise questions about the appropriateness of doing so.
Similarly, there are studies that make reference to Native Americans, overlooking the fact
that there are more than 550 tribes in the United States. Psychologists are encouraged to
consider the multidimensionality of ethnic, linguistic, and racial minority individuals and
groups when planning research studies.
Finally, some scholars have voiced concerns that racial/ethnic communities do not
directly benefit from studies in which their members participate. These concerns have
led to calls for research to be designed explicitly to be of benefit to the participants'
communities (CNPAAEMI, 2000; LaFromboise & Jackson, 1996; Marin & Marin, 1991;
Parham, 1993). To insure fidelity to the community that will be involved in the study,
psychologists are encouraged to develop relationships with leaders and/or cultural
brokers who may be essential brokers in the community. Even though researchers may
have a particular design and implementation plan in mind, through collaborations with
members of the community and potential participants, they are likely to develop
credibility and trust. They also are likely to develop a more beneficial study to the
community.
Thus, psychological researchers are encouraged to be grounded in the empirical
and conceptual literature on the ways that culture influences the variables under
investigation, as well as psychological and social science research traditions and skills.
This may be divided into three areas, research design, assessment, and analysis.
Research generation and design. This first area begins with the research
question that is asked. Goodwin (1996) delineates this as three steps: generation of the
research question, suitability of the research question, and then piloting the research question. All three steps are influenced by the researcher's cultural milieu. For example,
Fiske (1998) notes that the perceptions of Whites by racial/ethnic minority individuals are
rarely studied, because most researchers are White, and they are more interested in the
perceptions of their own group towards others. This is consistent, as we noted in
Guidelines #1 and #2, with preferences for in–group vs. out–group in social
categorization. Clearly, one's cultural worldview helps to shape the questions one has
about behavioral phenomena. This is not necessarily a problem unless the researcher
believes that his or her worldview is universal and objective. Davis, Nakayama, and
Martin (2000) suggest that this is the fallacy of objectivity, followed by the fallacy of
homogeneity, the latter defined as the assumption that all members of a group are similar.
Psychological researchers are encouraged to be aware of the cultural assumptions on
which their research questions are based (Egharevba, 2001).
Related to the research question is choosing culturally appropriate theories and
models on which to inform theory–driven inquiry (Quintana et al., 2001). Psychological
researchers are encouraged to be aware of, and if appropriate, to apply indigenous
theories when conceptualizing research studies. They are encouraged to include
members of cultural communities when conceptualizing research, with particular concern
for the benefits of the research to the community (Fontes, 1998; LaFromboise, 1988).
This may include involving representatives from the population and the host communities
in research design, sampling, and inviting feedback from the community in the final
written versions of the report (Gil & Bob, 1999; Rogler, 1999). Culturally centered
psychological researchers are encouraged to consider the psychological (rather than
demographic) contextual factors of race, ethnicity, language, gender, sexual orientation, socio–economic status, and other social dimensions of personal experience in
conceptualizing their research design (Fouad & Brown, 2000; Quintana et al., 2001).
Culturally centered psychological researchers are encouraged to seek appropriate
grounding in various modes of inquiry and to understand both the strengths and
limitations of the research paradigms applied to culturally diverse populations (Atkinson,
1985; Costantino, Malgady, & Rogler, 1986, 1994; Highlen, 1994; LaFromboise &
Foster, 1992; Marin & Marin, 1991; Sue, S., 1999; Sue & Sue, 1999; Suzuki, Prendes–
Lintel, Wertlieb, & Stallings, 1999). They strive to recognize and incorporate research
methods that most effectively complement the worldview and lifestyles of persons who
come from a specific cultural and linguistic population; e.g., quantitative and qualitative
research strategies (Hoshmand, 1989; Marin & Marin, 1991; Ponterotto & Casas, 1991).
This may include being knowledgeable about the ways in which ethnic and racial life
experiences influence and shape participants' responses to research questions (Clarke,
2000; Kim, Atkinson, Umemoto, 2001; Westermeyer & Janca, 1997).
Assessment. The second area of research is assessment. Culturally sensitive
psychological researchers strive to be knowledgeable about a broad range of assessment
techniques, data generating procedures, and standardized instruments whose validity,
reliability, and measurement equivalence have been investigated across culturally diverse
sample groups (CNPAAEMI, 2000; Helms, 1992; Marin & Marin, 1991; Padilla, 1995;
Spengler, 1998). They are encouraged not to use instruments that have not been adapted
for the target population, and they are also encouraged to use both pilot tests and
interviews to determine the cultural validity of their instruments (Samuda, 1998; Sue,
1999). They are encouraged to be knowledgeable not only about the linguistic equivalence of the instrument (e.g., that it is appropriately translated into the target
language), but also the conceptual and functional equivalence of the constructs tested. In
other words, they are encouraged to ascertain whether the constructs assessed by their
instruments have the same meaning across cultures, as well as the same function across
cultures (Rogler, 1999). In this, psychological researchers are urged to consider
culturally sensitive assessment techniques, data–generating procedures, and standardized
instruments whose validity, reliability, and measurement equivalence have been tested
across culturally diverse sample groups, particularly the target research group(s). They
are encouraged to present reliability, validity, and cultural equivalence data for use of
instruments across diverse populations.
Analysis and interpretation. The final area of consideration in culturally
sensitive research is analysis and interpretation. In analyzing and interpreting their data,
culturally sensitive psychological researchers are encouraged to consider cultural
hypotheses as possible explanations for their findings, to examine moderator effects, and
to use statistical procedures to examine cultural variables (Quintana et al., 2001).
Finally, culture–centered psychological researchers are encouraged to report on
the sample group's cultural, ethnic, and racial characteristics and to report on the cultural
limitations and generalizability of the research results as well. It is also recommended
that researchers design the study to be of benefit to participants, and to include
participants in the interpretation of results. They are encouraged to find ways for the
results to be of benefit to the community, and to represent the participants' perspectives
accurately and authentically (CNPAAEMI, 2000).
