This 50-minute session provided a space for candid discussions about the challenges faced by marginalized scholars and the role of positionality and perspective-taking in fostering inclusive academic environments.
Led by doctoral students David N. Legaspi and Daniel S. Da Silva (Utah State University), the panel featured a diverse group of scholars, including, Andrew Craig, Mirela Cengher (University of Maryland, Baltimore County), and Iser G. (“Willie”) DeLeon (University of Florida). Panelists represented a range of career stages and backgrounds, each bringing unique insights from their lived experiences as members of marginalized communities.
The session began with two brief presentations. The first, led by David Legaspi, introduced positionality and intersectional identities in academia, emphasizing how individuals’ social, cultural, and economic positions shape their professional experiences. The second, led by Daniel Santos Da Silva, focused on the importance of perspective-taking in fostering inclusive academic spaces. These presentations set the stage for an interactive discussion in which attendees were encouraged to share their experiences and engage with the panelists through structured prompts and live polling.
Key takeaways from the session
- A deeper understanding of positionality and marginalized identities in academia. Attendees left with insights into how systemic factors shape access, mentorship, and career advancement for underrepresented scholars.
- The importance of perspective-taking in building inclusive spaces. Participants explored strategies for fostering empathy and actionable allyship in their academic institutions.
The discussion highlighted how social justice movements have increased awareness of inclusivity in academia but that significant barriers remain. Panelists shared personal experiences of imposter syndrome, institutional bias, and limited mentorship opportunities, providing real-world examples of the need for continued systemic change. Importantly, the session moved beyond problem identification to focus on solutions, including ways those in privileged positions can leverage their influence to create more equitable environments.
This session exemplified Division 25 efforts to promote social equity within behavior analysis and academia at large. By structuring this session around behavior analytic principles—such as perspective-taking, reinforcement contingencies, and systemic intervention—Division 25 demonstrated how its discipline can contribute meaningfully to broader conversations on diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Why this matters for other divisions
Division 25’s session serves as a model for other APA divisions interested in addressing diversity and inclusion in a way that is both rigorous and action-oriented. By ensuring diverse representation among panelists, fostering audience participation through interactive engagement, and integrating behavioral science into discussions of equity, this session may guide other APA divisions in their contribution to meaningful change.
Division 25 remains committed to advancing equity within behavior analysis and beyond. This conversation was just one step in a larger movement, and we encourage other divisions to adopt similar frameworks to foster critical conversations in their respective fields.
