https://doi.org/10.24839/2325-7342.JN24.2.84 Psychology’s Hidden Figures: Undergraduate Psychology Majors’ (In)Ability to Recognize Our Diverse Pioneers Leslie D. Cramblet Alvarez* , Adams State University; K. Nicole Jones*, Colorado Mesa University; Chelsea Walljasper-Schuyler, Marissa Trujillo, Mikayla A. Weiser, Jerome L. Rodriguez, Rachael L. Ringler, and Jonah L. Leach, Adams State University ABSTRACT. Psychology as a science professes a dedication to diversity in many forms including celebrating diverse perspectives and people. Nevertheless, women and people of color, both historically and currently, face barriers to their advancement in the field. Illustrative of one of the challenges that women and psychologists of color face, undergraduate students know very little about psychology’s diverse historical roots including eminent pioneers who are women and people of color. Junior and senior psychology majors completed a name recognition task which included 42 pioneers in psychology, 21 of who were women, and 9 who were people of color. Participants recognized eminent women and people of color at significantly lower rates as compared to White, male pioneers (z = -12.95, p < .001, r = -.82; z = -10.62, p < .001, r = -.68, respectively). Having completed a History of Psychology course increased participants’ ability to recognize pioneers (U = 738.00, z = -3.79, p < .001, r = -.38) but primarily benefited White, Open Data, Open Materials, male pioneers. Because psychology majors, and Preregistration badges professionals, and practitioners are an increasingly earned for transparent research practices. Data diverse group, implications for the psychology and materials are available at https://osf.io/sy6ue/ and curriculum and minoritized students are discussed. https://osf.io/uf36h/, respectively. The three Keywords: History of Psychology, Gender, Diversity, Preregistered hypotheses are available at Psychology Curriculum https://osf.io/9chk7/. or psychologists, recognizing and honoring encouraging people of varied racial, ethnic, diversity is a core value. This value is evident gender identity, sexual orientation, and social class Fin national and regional organizations’ backgrounds to both participate in conducting diversity statements, ethical guidelines, handbooks, psychological research, education, practice, convening of diversity councils, and through the training, and service, and to recognize and value SPECIAL ISSUE learning outcomes for undergraduate psychology diverse people within these contexts” (Mission majors (APA, 2013; APA, 2017a, 2017b). Recently, and purpose, 2018). These developments PSI CHI JOURNAL OF Psi Chi adopted a diversity statement including are encouraging in light of psychology’s well- PSYCHOLOGICAL language that calls for action, “supporting and documented racist (e.g., Guthrie, 2003; Winston, RESEARCH 84 COPYRIGHT 2019 BY PSI CHI, THE INTERNATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN PSYCHOLOGY (VOL. 24, NO. 2/ISSN 2325-7342) *Faculty mentor Alvarez, Jones, Walljasper-Schuyler, Trujillo, Weiser, Rodriguez, Ringler, and Leach | Hidden Figures 2004) and sexist past (Tiefer, 1991). The discipline their PhDs after completing their studies (Russo & of psychology has come a long way in meeting the O’Connell, 1980). lofty goals set by Psi Chi’s written commitments to For women who were able to obtain a doctoral diversity, which is particularly important because degree, an additional barrier arose with regard to educational literature has suggested that exposure finding employment in major university settings: to stories about successful individuals who possess a nepotism policies. Antinepotism policies prevented shared identity to minoritized students has positive women from gaining employment in the same educational outcomes such as increasing interest institutions where their husbands worked (Russo in their chosen field (Rosenthal, Levy, London, & O’Connell, 1980); a prime example of this is Lobel, & Bazile, 2013). And, evidence has suggested Mary Cover Jones. In 1929, she was working as a that exposure to diverse faculty members has research associate at the University of California, positive outcomes on students’ experiences (CGC2; Berkeley. However, due to her husband’s affiliation Committee on Women in Psychology, 2017). with the university, she was denied the status of full Despite these benefits, there are limitations in professor and did not achieve this promotion until psychology students’ knowledge of and exposure 1959 at age 63, 30 years later. By the year 1976, one to diverse psychologists. Further, there are still in every four universities still had an antinepotism significant barriers faced by women and people of policy in place. This prevented many women from color in achieving educational and occupational securing paid positions in academia and research equity. In this article, we explore what psychology (Furumoto & Scarborough, 1986). Although majors know about our diverse history, in particular women and people of color faced significant chal- their ability to recognize pioneers of psychology who lenges entering and staying in the academic and are female and people of color, which illuminates research fields of psychology, many began to find the historical and contemporary barriers that jobs in applied psychology, developmental psychol- continue to prevent women and people of color ogy, and educational psychology. Women were often from attaining the eminence enjoyed by their encouraged in this direction because these fields White, male counterparts. were seen as more fitting for “female skills” such as care taking and child rearing (Rutherford, 2015). Historical Barriers However, many women would continue writing and In the field of psychology, contributions of conducting research with their husbands. women and people of color have been greatly Although publishing with a spouse is a cre- underappreciated. This is evidenced even in ative method to stay in the field, it might have the early history of the American Psychological contributed to a lack of recognition these women Association (APA), which began in 1892 as a received for the research they conducted (Russo men’s only organization. Despite the significant & O’Connell, 1980). For example, Mamie Phipps contributions women were already making to the Clark conducted research with her husband, field, they were prohibited from joining (Furumoto Kenneth Clark, that served as evidence in Brown v. & Scarborough, 1986). Not only were women Board of Education, the Supreme Court case which absent, but also people of color; all of the original desegregated American schools. Although some members of the APA were White men (Guzman, people are aware of this research, it is almost always Schiavo, & Puente, 1992). Although gender and in reference to Kenneth Clark; very few people attri- racial inequity within psychology continued, many bute it to Mamie, who was the primary researcher women and people of color pursued advanced (Aldridge & Christensen, 2013). degrees. Initially, these pioneers faced barriers in Minoritized women experience all of these obtaining doctoral degrees, and universities would barriers (educational, occupational, gender deny them their degree based solely on race and/or discrimination) with the added effect of racial gender (Russo & O'Connell, 1980). Many women discrimination. In 1863, the first African American of the 19th century were being denied entry into individuals earned their college degrees, but the graduate programs explicitly due to their gender, first PhD in psychology earned by an African and being denied PhDs despite completing the American woman named Inez Beverly Prosser requirements. Women like Mary Whiton Calkins was not until 1933. In 1977, 44 years later, 6.7% of SPECIAL ISSUE in 1895 (who studied at Harvard), Christine psychology doctorates were awarded to people of PSI CHI Ladd-Franklin in 1882 (Johns Hopkins), and Lillien color, and only 2.7% went to women of color (Russo JOURNAL OF Martin (Gottingen, under Muller) were all denied & O’Connell, 1980). Being at the complicated PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH COPYRIGHT 2019 BY PSI CHI, THE INTERNATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN PSYCHOLOGY (VOL. 24, NO. 2/ISSN 2325-7342) 85 Hidden Figures | Alvarez, Jones, Walljasper-Schuyler, Trujillo, Weiser, Rodriguez, Ringler, and Leach junction of two historically oppressed groups, steady increases in women’s degree attainment in this case, being both female and a person of compared to men and increases in degree comple- color, is known as intersectionality. First described tion by women of color. However, these numerical by Crenshaw (1989), intersectionality refers to improvements have not necessarily resulted in the compounded marginalization experienced better outcomes for women. The Committee on by someone who identifies with more than one Women in Psychology (2017) concluded, “debt minoritized or oppressed group. Although the levels have risen and . women students, particu- term had not yet been coined, Mamie Phipps Clark larly older and minority women, emerge from their (1983) was keenly aware of this when she noted, training programs with considerably higher debt than do their male, White, younger counterparts” although my husband had earlier secured (p. 46) and that “the salaries of women lag behind a teaching position at the City College men’s salaries in psychology more than in any other of New York, following my graduation it field” (p. 73). Thus, although more women are soon became apparent to me that a Black entering the field, it