Search

In the midst of a global pandemic and movements for racial justice, there is an opportunity to (re)imagine an Asian Americanist psychology that can bring about a more just society. The authors describe the contours of an Asian Americanist psychology that is grounded in historical context, an intersectional analysis, and representational ethics while focusing on community strengths and structural change. The article concludes with calls to action for Asian American psychologists, other psychologists of color, and White psychologists to envision a new era that centers Asian Americans in the multiracial pursuit of social justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prior to the 2021 American Psychologist special issue "Rendered Invisible: Are Asian Americans a Model or a Marginalized Minority?" (Yip et al., 2021), only seven articles on Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) populations were published in the journal in 3 decades. The special issue interrogated sources of invisibility and marginalization of AANHPIs not only in the field of psychology but also in the broader national landscape. The current commentary provides a deeper dive into one of the primary drivers of AANHPI invisibility, anti-Asian biases encountered during the federal grant review process, which contributes to low funding rates and insufficient research on AANHPI communities. Despite comprising over 6% of the U.S. population, less than 1% of the National Institutes of Health's funding portfolio supports science on AANHPI populations. This qualitative study revealed thematic barriers encountered during National Institutes of Health grant reviews. A one-time survey was circulated to professional scientific networks to obtain open-ended responses regarding applicants' and reviewers' experiences proposing research with AANHPI samples, resulting in data from N = 16 respondents. Respondents were asked to indicate their role in the review process (e.g., investigator, applicant, reviewer, other) and to provide open-ended responses detailing experiences of bias. Thematic coding revealed six principal themes: (1) invalidation, (2) limited reviewer knowledge, (3) oppression Olympics, (4) White comparison groups, (5) model minority myth, and (6) homogeneity of AANHPI groups. Building off these themes, this commentary concludes with five actionable policy and institutional recommendations aimed at achieving a more inclusive national research enterprise for AANHPI investigators and communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]