Unique Challenges Faced by Global Developmental Scientists During Peer-Review: A Survey Study.

Advancing generalizability, replicability, and public trust in developmental science requires testing theories across diverse contexts and disseminating findings widely. Yet researchers based outside the USA or studying non-USA samples (non-USA based researchers) often face obstacles during peer-review in mainstream psychology journals. Moreover, USA-based research on developmental science benefits from a global perspective. To better understand these challenges, we surveyed 229 non-USA based global developmental scientists about their peer-review experiences. We separately assessed how often participants expected and were asked to make changes that devalued the global aspects of their research, such as providing excessive justification for the sample or its generalizability, stratifying the sample, and collecting a new comparison sample. Analyses of free responses revealed a high incidence of comments received during peer review that questioned, minimized, or sought to alter the globally-relevant aspects of the research. Notably, participants felt the need to alter or downplay these aspects more frequently than they were asked to, suggesting anticipated or internalized devaluation of one's research among global developmental scientists. Qualitative responses reinforced these findings and offered recommendations for improving peer-review practices. Overall, the study highlights unique challenges that non-USA based researchers encounter during peer review. Such challenges may discourage the pursuit and publication of global developmental research, limiting overall advancement of replicability and generalizability of developmental science. Addressing these issues could strengthen developmental science by integrating insights from many contexts, ultimately enriching developmental research both within and beyond the USA. SUMMARY: Online survey conducted revealed the challenges encountered during peer-review by global developmental scientists (based outside of USA or studying non-USA samples). Various challenges during peer review that questioned, devalued or sought to alter globally relevant aspects of developmental research were frequently reported. Participants reported feeling the need to alter or downplay relevant aspects of their research more often than being requested to do so. Global researchers may face pervasive peer-review challenges, despite the importance of their work for generalizability and replicability of developmental science within and beyond USA.

Duke Scholars

Author Reiko Mazuka Psychology & Neuroscience