Collecting Data from Underrepresented Populations: Considerations for Ethnic Minority Research

The Importance of Ethnic Minority/Diversity Research

Ethnic minority/diversity (EM/D) research is an often overlooked but crucial area of the psychological sciences. As psychologists, our goal is to develop an in-depth understanding of the human experience. To do this, researchers must examine which aspects of this experience are universal and which are context- and culture-dependent. This requires work that considers culture and context, from the conceptualization of the research question to how papers are written and disseminated. However, most research published in top journals across psychological subfields has utilized samples from WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic) populations. This is problematic, as WEIRD populations are not representative of humanity (e.g., Rad, Martingano, & Ginges, 2018). Moreover, the majority of research has been conducted within the lens of white supremacy, meaning that many of our field’s findings have not been representative of or generalizable to other populations. EM/D research aims to pave paths to empowerment with the study of strengths and group-identified needs of ethnic communities while accounting for social and historical contexts (Lui et al., 2022). With recognition of the lack of published research that is specific to groups not part of the Western “mainstream,” EM/D psychology bridges the gap that leaves communities of color unrepresented in the literature. 

Presently and throughout history, the research community has used individuals belonging to ethnic minority populations in violent, trauma-inducing ways beneficial only to the research community (as opposed to the populations being researched; Breland & Stanton 2021). Exploitative research on ethnic minority populations dates back as early as the start of academic research. One early example in the 1840s was a white doctor in Alabama who performed extremely painful experiments on Black enslaved women without anesthesia under the guise of better understanding women’s health (Khabele et al., 2012). This history of abuse has led to a profound mistrust of researchers, and as a result has caused members of ethnic minority populations to avoid participating in research (Scharff et al., 2015). This is one factor in the reality that ethnic minority individuals are often underrepresented in research across fields. The goal of the present article is two-fold: to characterize some of the persistent issues in psychological sciences as they relate to underrepresented populations and to outline recommendations to move the field forward in a direction that truly encompasses all human experiences. 

Issues to Consider for Data Collection: Context, Privacy, and the Specific Needs of Different Communities

Working with underrepresented populations requires principal investigators and their research teams to be intentional about the conceptualization of research questions, recruitment of participants, data collection procedures, and dissemination of findings. This is the case even with populations whose numbers are increasing in predominantly white spaces. For example, in the context of undergraduate education, Latinx student enrollment has more than doubled from 2000 to 2016 (de Brey et al., 2019). This is important to highlight, as much of published psychological research utilizes undergraduate samples (Hanel & Vione, 2016). However, Latinx individuals continue to be underrepresented in the research literature. Potential reasons why Latinx individuals are still underrepresented in these samples include a lack of trust in researchers, financial difficulties, concerns related to confidentiality, and concerns related to how results will be utilized (George, Duran, & Norris, 2014; Johnson et al., 2019). These reasons extend to other groups, such as Black and immigrant groups (George, Duran, & Norris, 2014). Many existing studies throughout the literature have proven to be harmful to Black individuals and communities and, in many instances, the findings of the research conducted with these individuals have not been used to benefit this population (Scharff et al., 2015). A well-known example is the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, in which Black low-income men were lied to about the study’s aims and benefits (Scharff, 2010). In addition, the men enrolled were also not treated for syphilis although the researchers had the capability to do so. For immigrant populations, a pervasive issue in the literature is that researchers often ignore the unique cultural differences found among groups often grouped together under a larger pan-ethnic category. For example, in the case of Asians and Asian Americans, ignoring the differences between East Asians and South Asians can perpetuate a false sense of homogeneity that can lead to biased research outcomes, generalizability across subgroups, and a diminished likelihood of reproducibility of results (Trimble & Bhadra, 2013). 

Recommendations for Collecting Data from Underrepresented Populations

While much work is still needed to ensure that the psychological literature is representative of all people, there are steps researchers can take to get closer to this goal. The following is a list of recommendations for engaging members of underrepresented populations: 

1. Consider the advertisement of research opportunities (e.g., highlighting the relevance of this research to the participating community as a whole, emphasizing the identity of the PI to instill trust when it is relevant to that of the participants being recruited, and offering access to the findings once the study is completed).
2. Be sensitive to participants’ concerns about data being exposed or shared by offering anonymity and by explaining the de-identification process thoroughly. 
3. When proposing new studies, researchers should consider whether the community of interest wants or needs these questions answered and how intersectional identities within communities might impact results to avoid an “ethnic gloss,” i.e., overgeneralizations about communities as a whole. 
4. Create relationships with community leaders to help balance transparency about research aims, the informed consent process, and collaboration with researchers of and for the community.  
5. Make research a collaborative process by communicating expectations to participants beforehand, asking for their input at different stages of the research process, debriefing them when applicable, and sharing findings with them and the community in ways they can understand/benefit from.
6. Ensure that when potentially invasive protocols are needed for data collection, the necessary equipment/technology is made for or can be adapted for participants from different backgrounds. For example, when working with Black participants researchers should ensure that any touch needed for the research (e.g., hair) is comfortable for the participant (Brown et al., 2023). 

In summary, diversity, equity, and inclusion concerns should be addressed at every level of the research process, even outside of the EM/D research space. The onus is on researchers who hold power to ensure that the considerations and recommendations put forth in this article are executed. 

References 

Breland, J.Y., & Stanton, M. V. (2021). Anti-Black racism and behavioral medicine: Confronting the past to envision the future. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibab090 

Brown, L., Rollock, D., & Foti, D. (2023). Conducting electroencephalography with black individuals: Barriers, recommendations, and impact on generalizability. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10(2), 178–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/23727322231197739 

De Brey, C., Musu, L., McFarland, J., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., Diliberti, M., Zhang, A., Branstetter, C., & Wang, X. (2019, February). Status and trends in the education of racial and ethnic groups 2018.

George, S., Duran, N., & Norris, K. (2014). A systematic review of barriers and facilitators to minority research participation among African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, and Pacific Islanders. American Journal of Public Health, 104(2), e16–e31. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301706

Hanel, P. H., & Vione, K. C. (2016). Do student samples provide an accurate estimate of the general public?. 

PloS one, 11(12), e0168354. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168354 

Johnson, K. E., Salas-Wright, C. P., Córdova, D., Ugalde, J., Todic, J., & Mendoza Lua, F. (2019). The acceptability of biobehavioral research with latino youth in the United States. Journal of Adolescent Research, 34(5), 597-618. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558418765397

Khabele, D., Holcomb, K., Connors, N. K., & Bradley, L. (2021). A perspective on James Marion Sims, MD, and Antiblack Racism in obstetrics and gynecology. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, 28(2), 153–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2020.10.027

Lui, P. P., Gobrial, S., Pham, S., Giadolor, W., Adams, N., & Rollock, D. (2022). Open science and multicultural research: Some data, considerations, and recommendations. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 28(4), 567–586. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000541

Rad, M. S., Martingano, A. J., & Ginges, J. (2018). Toward a psychology of Homo sapiens: Making psychological science more representative of the human population. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(45), 11401–11405. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1721165115

Scharff, D.P., Mathews, K.J., Jackson, P., Hoffsuemmer, J., Martin, E., & Edwards, D. (2015). More than Tuskegee: Understanding Mistrust about Research Participation. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 21(3), 879-897. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.0.0323.

Trimble, J. E., & Bhadra, M. (2013). Ethnic gloss. The Encyclopedia of Cross‐Cultural Psychology. New York, NY: John Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118339893.wbeccp204