Search

The open science (OS) movement has the potential to fundamentally shape how researchers conduct research and distribute findings. However, the implications for research on lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex, and queer/questioning (LGBTIQ+) experiences present unique considerations. In this paper, included in the special issue on Reimagining LGBTIQ+ Research, we explore how the OS movement broadens access to and comprehension of LGBTIQ+ experiences while simultaneously imposing limitations on the representation of these identities and raising concerns about risks to LGBTIQ+ researchers and participants. Our research focuses on three facets of the OS movement. First, we examine practices related to open data, which advocates that data should be accessible to other researchers to analyze. Yet, providing access to such data challenges may compromise trust between the research team and study participants. Second, we examine practices related to open replicable research, particularly as it has the potential to both highlight and erase the experiences of groups within the LGBTIQ+ community. Finally, we consider how open access, making scholarly articles free to the public, may help educate a broader audience on the lived experiences of LGBTIQ+ people, but in regions where these identities remain heavily stigmatized and/or criminalized, access may be blocked or individuals could be penalized for retrieving this information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article addresses the complex issue of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data collection in workplaces, highlighting the intricate balance between fostering inclusion and mitigating potential harm and exclusion.1 This tension manifests uniquely across diverse cultural, legal, and organizational settings. We review existing literature, offer practical guidance for decision‐makers, and outline future research avenues. While SOGI data collection in workplaces can enhance diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and elevate the visibility of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, and queer (LGBTIQ+) employees, challenges include the risk of discrimination, privacy concerns, and linguistic complexities. To address these, researchers and practitioners must consider the purpose, language, and cultural context of data collection, involving LGBTIQ+ stakeholders, and conducting reconnaissance studies. Future research opportunities lie in understanding employee willingness to share SOGI data, motivations of human resource (HR) and DEI professionals, and the impact on organizational culture. Reimagining LGBTIQ+ research to ease the tension between inclusion and protection, we conclude that responsible SOGI data collection demands a nuanced approach that prioritizes inclusion and equity while addressing privacy concerns and potential harm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The delayed uptake of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine offers an opportunity to explore how temporality and risk are at work in everyday life. Drawing from a mixed-methods study with parents (N = 50) in Northern California, this study explored parents’ decision to delay HPV vaccination for their children among parents who had not yet vaccinated (n = 27). At the core of these decisions were temporal assessments of risk whereby parents weighed their child’s (perceived) present risk of HPV exposure against the uncertain perceived risks of the vaccine itself. Our findings are promising as they indicate that given time, and the continued growth of evidence regarding the safety and effectiveness of HPV vaccination, completion rates should increase. However, our results also suggest that vaccination delays are not merely a matter of scientific doubt but also based on parents’ (potentially inaccurate) perceptions of their child’s sexual readiness, and thus potentially more difficult to overcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current study broadens our understanding of workplace gender harassment (a subdomain of sex-based harassment) by developing an expanded taxonomy and measurement instrument. We move beyond sexual insults to include hostility targeting one’s gender, gender role (non)conformity, and motherhood status. In Study 1, we convened a panel of seven subject matter experts to brainstorm behaviors covering the full content domain of gender harassment, which they later grouped into categories in an open card-sorting task. To tap these categories, we combined survey items from the existing literature with a pool of new items. In Study 2, we administered these items to 425 working women. Exploratory principal axis factoring and confirmatory factor analyses revealed an underlying five-factor structure in these data, reflecting both new and extant themes from the literature. This work culminated in a 20-item scale, the Gender Experiences Questionnaire, assessing five dimensions of gender harassment: Sexist Remarks, Sexually Crude/Offensive Behavior, Infantilization, Work/Family Policing, and Gender Policing. This multidimensional conceptualization of gender harassment, coupled with the new measure, offers a more nuanced view of women’s experiences of hostile work environments. This can further the work of researchers, human resources personnel, managers, educators, policy makers, law scholars and practitioners, and other specialists seeking to understand (and scale back) harassment based on sex and gender. This understanding can potentially inform intervention and prevention efforts in any organized setting (e.g., work, school, and politics) where gender may be devalued. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This collection of studies tested aspects of Cortina’s theory of selective incivility as a “modern” manifestation of sexism and racism in the workplace and also tested an extension of that theory to ageism. Survey data came from employees in three organizations: a city government (N = 369), a law enforcement agency (N = 653), and the U.S. military (N = 15,497). According to analyses of simple mediation, target gender and race (but not age) affected vulnerability to uncivil treatment on the job, which in turn predicted intent to leave that job. Evidence of moderated mediation also emerged, with target gender and race interacting to predict uncivil experiences, such that women of color reported the worst treatment. The article concludes with implications for interventions to promote civility and nondiscrimination in organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]