Description
Journal analyses have documented that child development research from the Majority World (Africa, Asia, Middle East, Latin America and the Caribbean) continues to be highly underrepresented in our peer-review journals (Moriguchi, 2022; Nielsen et al., 2017), despite the well-recognized need for inclusivity to ensure a theoretically comprehensive and globally applicable developmental science. In a survey of scholars engaging in Majority World research, among the challenges identified were bias in the peer-review process and reviewers considering cultural research as unimportant (Raval et al., 2024). Thus, to promote a global science, diversification of editorial boards and the reviewer-base to include scholars with expertise in Majority World research is needed. In addition, training for editors and reviewers from the Minority World (North America, Europe, Oceania) to provide thoughtful and culturally sensitive feedback is critical.In this conversation roundtable, we, the members of the International Affairs committee of SRCD, will discuss the ways in which Minority World reviewers could provide contextually relevant reviews of manuscripts reporting on child development research about the Majority World. Engaging the audience, we will discuss specific examples and ways to identify bias, monitor and minimize it, and enhance the quality of the reviews provided. We will discuss the ways in which action editors can engage in the editorial decision-making process from soliciting reviews to making a decision to ensure contextually relevant feedback is provided. Our overarching goal is to strengthen the peer-review process for Majority World child development research to reduce barriers to publishing this work. Journal analyses have documented that child development research from the Majority World (Africa, Asia, Middle East, Latin America and the Caribbean) continues to be highly underrepresented in our peer-review journals (Moriguchi, 2022; Nielsen et al., 2017), despite the well-recognized need for inclusivity to ensure a theoretically comprehensive and globally applicable developmental science. In a survey of scholars engaging in Majority World research, among the challenges identified were bias in the peer-review process and reviewers considering cultural research as unimportant (Raval et al., 2024). Thus, to promote a global science, diversification of editorial boards and the reviewer-base to include scholars with expertise in Majority World research is needed. In addition, training for editors and reviewers from the Minority World (North America, Europe, Oceania) to provide thoughtful and culturally sensitive feedback is critical.
In this conversation roundtable, we, the members of the International Affairs committee of SRCD, will discuss the ways in which Minority World reviewers could provide contextually relevant reviews of manuscripts reporting on child development research about the Majority World. Engaging the audience, we will discuss specific examples and ways to identify bias, monitor and minimize it, and enhance the quality of the reviews provided. We will discuss the ways in which action editors can engage in the editorial decision-making process from soliciting reviews to making a decision to ensure contextually relevant feedback is provided. Our overarching goal is to strengthen the peer-review process for Majority World child development research to reduce barriers to publishing this work.
| Period | 3 May 2025 |
|---|---|
| Event title | SRCD 2025 Biennial Meeting |
| Event type | Conference |
| Location | Minneapolis, United States, MinnesotaShow on map |
| Degree of Recognition | International |