• DOI:10.1017/S0140525X15000035
• Corpus ID: 206263185

It may be harder than we thought, but political diversity will (still) improve social psychological science.

@article{Crawford2015ItMB,
  title={It may be harder than we thought, but political diversity will (still) improve social psychological science.},
  author={Jarret T. Crawford and Jose L. Duarte and Jonathan Haidt and Lee Jussim and Charlotta Stern and Philip E. Tetlock},
  journal={The Behavioral and brain sciences},
  year={2015},
  volume={38},
  pages={
          e164
        }
}

• Jarret T. Crawford, Jose L. Duarte, +3 authors P. Tetlock
• Published 2015
• Psychology, Medicine
• The Behavioral and brain sciences

In our target article, we made four claims: (1) Social psychology is now politically homogeneous; (2) this homogeneity sometimes harms the science; (3) increasing political diversity would reduce this damage; and (4) some portion of the homogeneity is due to a hostile climate and outright discrimination against non-liberals. In this response, we review these claims in light of the arguments made by a diverse group of commentators. We were surprised to find near-universal agreement with our first two claims, and we note that few challenged our fourth claim. Most of the disagreements came in response to our claim that increasing political diversity would be beneficial. We agree with our critics that increasing political diversity may be harder than we had thought, but we explain why we still believe that it is possible and desirable to do so. We conclude with a revised list of 12 recommendations for improving political diversity in social psychology, as well as in other areas of the academy.