QuantCrit applies critical race theory to quantitative methodology in pursuit of racial justice. Although quantitative analyses in the service of justice date back to the 19th century 1, 2, the term QuantCrit is relatively new, first appearing in a footnote in 2016 [3] and gaining prominence in a 2018 special issue [4]. Since then, the term QuantCrit has appeared in nearly 300 publications.1

QuantCrit is often described as a lens applied to the design, analysis, and interpretation of quantitative research 5, 6, 7. Through my research [8–12], I have come to appreciate the commitment QuantCrit demands to understanding how social constructs like race, gender, and class are formed and how intersecting structures of oppression shape outcomes. QuantCrit also requires the selection of measures and models that align with theorization about these constructs and structures. For me, such commitment allows QuantCrit to function as more than a lens; it operates as a form of corrective surgery that permanently alters my view of the world and the work I perform within it.

QuantCrit’s focus on the centrality of racism and the social construction of race 13, 14•• challenges the use of race as an explanation for a given outcome 15, 16. Instead, when used as an explanatory variable, race functions as a proxy for racism [17]. The same logic applies when other socially constructed variables, such as gender or sexuality, are used to explain variance in outcomes. Race serving as a proxy for racism was core to my critique of deficit narratives produced through statistical analyses that use race as an explanatory variable [11]. At the time I published this critique, I encouraged researchers to interpret coefficients for race as differential effects produced by the intervention of focus rather than the effect of race itself.

Since engaging in that work, my understanding of the construction of identity categories and their role in oppression reveals two facets of an underdeveloped logic. The first facet pertains to mechanisms that structure identity categories and the performativity, social location, and access to opportunity, resources, and power manufactured by that structuring. The second facet focuses on the ways different theories understand the operation of oppression. Together, these concepts have important implications for the design of quantitative research, the selection of measures and modeling techniques, and the interpretations of findings from such analyses.

Before I explore these two facets in detail, I position myself in relation to my work with QuantCrit.