A decolonized science requires bigger, bolder, and less incremental change

This commentary is written in response to Sharpe's (2024) article titled "Editor Bias and Transparency in Psychology's Open Science Era." The article clearly describes the conversation on bias, transparency, and editor accountability occurring in the field of psychology in recent years. However, in this era of public accountability, where there is a groundswell seeking a more decolonized science, we use the commentary to discuss how the article could have gone further. We used an equity model to explore whether the model of change being proposed by Sharpe is at the right level of analysis and whether it is equipped with the needed ingredients to bring about a solution to the long-standing problem of editor bias and lack of transparency. We offer an alternative to the individual model that Sharpe's article puts forth and recommend the use of a systems thinking approach to generate action items for a more decolonized science in the realm of publishing and editor bias. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)

Economics · Positive economics · Health and Medical Research Impacts · Psychology