記住我
Police violence against the Black community, including the killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and others, brought increased attention to the long-standing racial inequities in income, occupation, housing, health, and stark disparities in mortality from the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Racial inequities are also long-standing in academia (e.g., (1,2)). An increasing number of organizations have recently released written commitments to support antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion in their sphere of influence (e.g., (3–5)). Alongside these statements, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has committed millions of dollars to support research on the implications of structural racism for health (6).
The American Psychosomatic Society (APS) is an international professional society that aims to advance the scientific study of biological, behavioral, and social factors in health among educators, clinicians, and researchers. The organization’s major activities include an annual scientific conference, recognition and awards, mentorship programs, the peer-reviewed journal Psychosomatic Medicine, and professional education and networking. APS took an initial step to outwardly support antiracism in June of 2020 by issuing a society-wide antiracism statement (7). To move beyond the statement, APS sought to implement antiracist frameworks in the conduct of the organization by forming the Antiracism Task Force (ARTF) in 2021. In this article, we describe the inaugural year of activities of the APS ARTF. We also note that the ARTF learned from other agents of change within APS who have been engaged in activities relevant to antiracism, and we therefore highlight other historical antiracism efforts of the society throughout this article.
Operationalizing AntiracismThere are many ways to define antiracism, and there is no singularly agreed-upon definition among activists, scholars, and practitioners. For the purposes of our work, we use historian and antiracist scholar Ibram X. Kendi’s definition, which states that antiracism includes ideas and policies that strive to promote equity among racial groups (8). There are many ways to embody antiracism in science, such as enhancing training, funding, and mentorship opportunities and promoting the voices of scholars from communities subjected to marginalization. Professional societies can support and advance such activities, but we assert here that an important first step for an organization is to look inward and assess its policies, procedures, and processes to ensure that antiracism is centered at the infrastructure level (9). From there, an organization can start to address some of its systemic problems that likely perpetuate internal inequities as well as those that spread outwardly to broader communities. We also emphasize that we view antiracism as an ongoing process rather than a state that can be achieved or a task that can be accomplished.
Organization and Goals of This ArticleBelow we summarize the key activities of the ARTF as a case study for how a professional scientific organization can incorporate antiracism into its procedures, policies, and programs. This effort complements recent pledges (e.g., (4)), commentaries by editorial boards (e.g., (10)), and reports by professional societies (e.g., (11)). Our goals are twofold: first, we see this article as one way to accomplish our pledge of being transparent with the APS membership about our work, which is an important strategy for pursuing antiracism. Thus, we describe our challenges and lessons learned in addition to reporting our progress. Second, we aim to describe our progress and challenges in a manner that is informative for other professional organizations embarking on antiracism initiatives. To that end, we also share an open repository of antiracism resources from scholars whose work informed our efforts, with the hope that these resources will also support the antiracism efforts of others.
Formation of APS ARTFThe creation of the ARTF was a direct result of the strong leadership of then APS President Dr. Paige Green. In late 2020, she brought her vision to the society’s Council, a governing board comprising nominated members, with the clear directive that this was to be a task force that identified targets for systemic change on a rapid timeline. Crucial support and guidance were provided by Laura Degnon, CAE, President and Chief Executive Officer of Degnon and Associates, APS’s association management company. Dr. Green’s charge to the ARTF was as follows: Identify and remediate the systems, policies, and practices of APS that perpetuate racism. This directive would involve examining every corner of our organization—including our mission statement, bylaws, awards programs, committee compositions, and others—to ensure that they reflect our commitment to antiracism. She additionally asked the task force to work efficiently to define root problems, expected deliverables, and timelines, and to identify methodologies and processes for the engagement of other members interested in serving on the task force. In approving the formation of the task force, the Council pledged to be transparent as they engaged in self-evaluation and took concrete action toward those goals.
Application and Selection ProcessTo select the members that would make up the ARTF, the APS Council generated the questions to be asked on the application form. The application asked about race/ethnicity and three questions: “What drives your interest in being part of this task force?” “What past experience do you have in promoting antiracist action for change?” and “What ideas do you have that APS could possibly implement?” An email sent to all members yielded 11 applications, which were discussed by the Council members. The number of people on the task force was based on research suggesting that the optimal size of a committee is 7 ± 2 members, with the additional consideration that smaller committees are more effective if time delays are costly (12). Thus, five people were chosen to be on the task force, with the addition of one ex-officio Council liaison. The applicant pool included members with extensive experience in promoting antiracist actions and a number of outstanding ideas to be implemented. In deciding the makeup of the task force, the Council members a) sought applicant racial/ethnic diversity, b) prioritized those who had experience with institutional policy change, and c) created a balance of relatively junior versus senior individuals. The Council’s vision was that applicants who were not selected could later be involved in executing the plans generated by the ARTF.
Implementing Guidance From Antiracism, Equity, and Justice Frameworks in the ARTFMultiple scholars have published frameworks for promoting antiracism and decentering whiteness in research, policies, and practice (e.g., (13–18)). Each of these frameworks highlights different areas of focus, but there is considerable overlap in their themes and recommendations. Some of these themes include a) increasing the visibility of racism by bringing it into the field of awareness through naming, acknowledging, and collecting and reporting data about it; b) amplifying the voices of racially diverse individuals by promoting antiracist recruitment and retention efforts, by increasing racial and ethnic representation among those who are given influential roles, awards, and resources, and by citing the scholarship of racially and ethnically diverse experts; c) collaboration with those who are directly impacted through fostering reciprocity in knowledge and sharing, providing opportunities for those impacted to share feedback, and working alongside individuals who are directly impacted; and d) accountability through using systems-centered or root-cause language, increasing transparency of representation through data collection and reporting, establishing and implementing remediation plans for problematic practices, advocating for system-level change, and ensuring that promoting antiracism includes placing some responsibility on those with power and privilege to take action. In our work within the ARTF, we attempted to use these themes as “guiding principles” or “best practices” in our decision making, analysis, and recommendations. Table 1 illustrates how the ARTF plans to engage with these activities in the short, medium, and long terms.
TABLE 1 - Short-, Medium-, and Long-Term Goals of the APS Antiracism Task Force Principle/Theme Short-Term Goals Medium-Term Goals Long-Term Goals Increase the visibility of racism in research environments, clinical practice, and organizational systems to eliminate it Participate in and/or lead antiracism trainings, forums, etc. at home institutions and share knowledge gained with other task force members Consult with APS committees and Special Interest Groups on their practices and serve as a resource to enhance their equity-promoting procedures and policies Publish an analogous article to the current article outlining the Society’s antiracism activities in its first 5 years Amplify the voices of racially diverse individuals through mentorship, outreach, recruitment, and retention activities Discuss Past President Dr. Paige Green’s proposal to engage in outreach and community-building with MSI including HBCUs (Box 1) Share resources on best practices for antiracist mentoring using an Open Science platform: https://osf.io/29dhj/ARTF = Antiracism Task Force; APS = American Psychosomatic Society; MSI = Minority Serving Institutions; HBCUs = Historically Black Colleges and Universities.
MSIs include Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions; Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions, Hispanic Serving Institutions, Native American Serving Nontribal Institutions, Predominantly Black Institutions, HBCUs, and Tribal Colleges and Universities (19).The first agenda item for the initial ARTF meeting was deciding on a leadership structure. A concern was raised about centering white1 voices in the ARTF’s leadership. Given that white individuals had previously expressed interest in chairing the committee, this was an inflection point that could have created tension or awkwardness. Instead, what ensued was a productive and nondefensive conversation that set the expectation that the ARTF would have to engage in difficult conversations like these and to approach rather than avoid these important topics. We agreed that the leadership of our group should reflect diverse professional expertise, lived experiences, and perspectives. Ultimately, two co-chairs were selected: one Black, Latino, and Native (Stanton) and one white (Mezuk). However, in many ways, our task force used a shared leadership structure in which different members proposed ideas, contributed critical input, and took responsibility for action and decision making. Shared leadership has been associated with increased productivity and satisfaction, including in virtual teams (22).
Culture of Open CommunicationWe sought to support open communication, including a commitment to responsible stewardship of important spaces. To that end, we engaged in discussions around creating an environment that prioritized antiracism principles and practices, which included the flexibility of making mistakes (e.g., with language) while remaining accountable and committed to a continuous process of learning and improving. Upon forming the task force, we spent time building a foundation of trust. This involved discussion about models of antiracism, forming a shared working vocabulary, and identifying core shared values, including a commitment to growth, mutual respect, and authenticity. This foundation of trust was illustrated by starting meetings with a check-in on everyone’s well-being and acknowledging significant national and international events that may have affected our well-being. In addition, one member described receiving inspiration from Ijeoma Oluo and Dr. Tiffany Jana (23,24), who highlight that receiving constructive feedback is “a gift” because difficult conversations often involve courage and risk-taking for the person who raises an alternative perspective or who sheds light on a gap in awareness, as well as trust that the others will respond with receptiveness and growth rather than defensiveness.
Our group also leveraged technology to efficiently share resources that were separate from core activities. Our team used Slack as a between-meeting communication tool to facilitate rapid, interactive communication and to reduce the amount of email from our activities (25,26). We created channels for each of our activities, including one for establishing meeting agendas, one for sharing resources, and one for each of the ARTF’s projects outlined in this document.
Facilitative FactorsKey facilitative factors included the long-standing commitment from senior scientific and executive leadership, task force members with commitment to centering our activities on those harmed by systemic racism, the institutional knowledge and lived experience of task force members, and prior research and theory from influential thinkers. Notably, a critical facilitative factor was the broader society’s commitment to diversity. In a membership survey fielded in 2021, 99.2% of respondents marked “agree” or “strongly agree” to the statement, “As a professional organization, APS has a responsibility to support diversity, equity, and inclusion in the field.” The structure of the ARTF, with a Council Liaison, also facilitated support and encouragement from leadership. In addition, work of senior members in antiracism efforts promoted a sense of community, and the buy-in and support from APS leadership, who have the most institutional influence within the organization, were essential in supporting our progress. In centering antiracism, we acknowledged that individuals who hold racial and ethnic minoritized identities often share more burden of service (i.e., the time tax; (27)). Therefore, one facilitative factor of our activities was prioritization of equitable distribution of work within our team. The culture was one of shared leadership where members took turns volunteering to lead projects, with other members contributing or critically revising pieces. There were times that members would acknowledge when they had not taken the lead in a while, particularly when someone who did volunteer had already contributed substantially. In this way, we checked in with each other about challenges in work and personal lives to ensure that we were able to balance the work of the taskforce with these other competing demands. We recognize that this may not always be the case for individuals appointed to spearhead this work in their organization. Furthermore, by keeping the task force small during this initial period, we were able to build trust, which facilitated more effective work over the longer term. A culture of trust was facilitated because each member described experiences and shared ideas that we had each included as part of our as part of our applications for task force membership. These initial discussions allowed us to find common ground and fostered a sense of shared dedication to antiracist work.
In addition, we also considered the overall long-term impact of our actions in our decision-making process. This was an important facilitative factor because we acknowledged that, although some actions might lead to a short-term gain or have positive intentions, they might not have much of a larger impact. For example, our committee had initially written a letter of solidarity against anti-Black racism in support of Black Lives Matter protests, but we eventually decided against publishing it, because we could not point to a larger impact of the letter. Instead, we chose to focus our energy on changing organizational practices and policies to remain in line with our charge. This decision helped prevent the gradual drift of our mission away from its original scope and enabled us to retain our focus on broader, longer-term, systemic organizational change.
TASK FORCE ACTIVITIES, OUTCOMES, AND LESSONS LEARNEDThe ARTF has carried out both internal-facing activities directed toward APS operations and external-facing activities that involved engaging with collaborators and agencies outside APS. As described in Table 2, our internal-facing activities included reviewing the bylaws, the awards process, and the annual meeting program, and encouraging the Council to evaluate the extent to which APS’s financial investments and portfolio reflect antiracism and social responsibility. Viewed through the lens of antiracism, we noted the potential for inequity in some APS procedures and recommended amendments to the procedures and bylaws. In addition, we identified practices that may have served to perpetuate racial inequities, such as biases in award nomination procedures and disparities in resources for those submitting abstracts to the annual meeting. We also requested that the Council work with our financial investment consultants to review the organization’s portfolio and identify any values-consistent adjustments that would reflect APS’s antiracism mission.
TABLE 2 - Key Activities of the APS Antiracism Task Force: 2021–2022 Problem or Challenge Actions Outcomes or Deliverables Lessons Learned Next Steps Address how organizational bylaws may contribute to exclusion Reviewed bylaws and processesAPS = American Psychosomatic Society; ARTF = Antiracism Task Force.
We also engaged in two external-facing activities early on in our work. The first was to draft a statement from APS standing against xenophobia, anti-Asian rhetoric, and violence against Asian, Asian American, and Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities, which was published on the APS Web site (28). This statement commented on the harm that “model minority” stereotypes—which are often directed toward AAPI—can cause by silencing the voices of AAPI, creating division between AAPI and other racial minority groups that impede solidarity, and overlooking heterogeneity among ethnic groups in terms of history, language, culture, and experiences. The second activity was to respond to the NIH Request for Information (NOT-OD-21-066), which requested feedback on current approaches and suggestions for advancing racial equity in the biomedical workforce and in health disparities research, as part of the UNITE initiative to address structural racism in biomedicine (29). Our response discussed successful examples of programs that address issues of diversity such as the well-established APS Young Investigator Colloquium (30). The ARTF called for the NIH to meaningfully integrate the perspectives of underrepresented minority investigators by supporting funding opportunities on more inclusive topics (e.g., integrative and interdisciplinary versus disease-centric research), approaches (e.g., community-based, mixed-method, and participatory approaches), and research environments (e.g., strong academic-community partnerships). As noted previously, the ARTF made a conscious decision to pivot to inward-facing activities after these early efforts to maximize impact within the organization and adhere to our charge.
We also highlight important antiracism work in the organization that happened outside of the ARTF. Some examples are listed in Box 1. Spanning decades, these examples demonstrate strong advocacy by APS members to advance racial diversity, equity, and inclusion within the society. Members from traditionally underrepresented and/or marginalized backgrounds and those with less status (e.g., trainees) are afforded fewer opportunities for having their voices heard and for directing change within the organization. Thus, one of the goals of the ARTF (Table 1) is to create formal pathways for members to bring issues and ideas for future initiatives to the society leadership.
Box 1. Antiracism work outside of the Antiracism Task Force Although the ARTF was established in 2021, some APS members have a long-standing history of advocating for racial diversity, equity, and inclusion within the organization. For example, many years ago, Dr. Julian Thayer helped to enact changes through the APS Council related to increasing racial diversity and representation. The APS Diversity Initiative has, for many years, provided travel awards and created networking opportunities for collaboration. It has also sponsored a “Minority Symposium” at annual meetings. Example symposium titles and speakers were as follows: “Metabolic Syndrome, Stress, and Health Disparity,” co-chaired by Drs. Julian Thayer and Gaston Kapuku with speakers Drs. Sherita Hill, Tiffany Powell-Wiley, and Lucile Adams-Campbell; “Unfair Treatment, Socio-economic Status and Health,” co-chaired by Drs. Gaston Kapuku and Shari Waldstein with speakers Drs. Tené Lewis, Danielle Beatty-Moody, David Williams, and Selina Mohammed; and “Early Adversity and Health Disparities,” chaired by Dr. Tené Lewis with speakers Drs. Debbie Barrington, Lisa Barnes, and Tyan Parker-Dominguez. The APS Program Committee has increased the focus on antiracism through highlighting diversity and the impacts of racism on health in conference themes and pre-conference workshops during the annual meeting. Dr. Paige Green proposed an initiative to engage in outreach and relationship-building with Minority-Serving Institutions. The immediate action item would be to appoint a task force with liaisons from the ARTF, Membership Committee, and the Council to facilitate collaboration, communication, and decision making. Dr. Paige Green, in her role as Chair of the Diversity Initiative, proposed an expansion of the Diversity Scholar Travel Award (previously a one-time award of funding to reimburse travel expenses) to become a 2-year mentoring program where awardees are paired with senior Society members. These mentors commit to sustaining their mentoring relationship beyond the initial award period. Toward the goal of creating a cohort and increasing belonging, the Diversity Scholars cohort and mentors will have a half-day colloquium each year to present their research or a professional development challenge. Awardees will additionally receive travel funds for year 1, free registration both years, and a 2-year membership to the Society. Dr. Suzanne Segerstrom, in her role as Editor-in-Chief of the society’s journal, Psychosomatic Medicine, put into place several changes to promote diversity. For example, there was an approximate 30% increase in representation of People of Color on the Editorial Board. Half the Associate Editors are women, and three of the eight identify as a racial/ethnic minority member. She also created an Editor Working Group on Assessing Diversity. Setting the Stage for the FutureAs the first year of the ARTF comes to a close, we are encouraged by the progress made, yet recognize that there remain a number of important goals. As the ARTF moves further toward engaging membership and contributing to a culture of antiracism within the society, we highlight below several areas on which we will continue to focus. Table 1 illustrates how the ARTF plans to engage with these activities in the medium and long terms.
Identifying a Permanent Location for Antiracism Activities Within APSBy definition, “task forces” are time limited with a focused set of priorities. The ARTF anticipates discussing with senior leadership a future home for our activities. For example, we might consider becoming a standing committee, which is a semipermanent group of members that oversees progress on society objectives and reports to the Council on an annual basis with its activities. Another option might be for the task force to merge with or become a subgroup within the Diversity Initiative Special Interest Group (SIG). SIGs are more informal groups of members who work on projects or initiatives based on shared interest. Although SIGs report to the Council and can hold events at the annual meeting, they have less official influence within the organization and are not tasked with carrying out objectives as part of the society’s formal infrastructure. Several factors will be prioritized in the final decision about where to house the ARTF’s activities: a) soliciting input on what members would like this task force to become, b) continuing to talk with existing committees and SIGs to determine how the ARTF can be a helpful resource, and c) incorporating the support of APS members willing to take on priorities identified by ARTF and other new projects. We consider it critical to include member voices in the work of transforming APS into an antiracist professional organization long term.
Increasing Awareness of Antiracism Activities in the OrganizationOur task force has considered increasing recognition and visibility of activities in APS that support antiracism, equity, and justice. At the APS 2022 annual meeting, the ARTF received feedback that there is an absence of representation in antiracism, equity, and justice in the APS awards that are currently offered. It was noted that there are currently no awards named after APS members who have championed issues related to racial justice, nor are there currently any awards that are specifically for recognizing members who have shown dedication to these issues. Based on this feedback, the ARTF has begun discussions around how it can facilitate the creation of an award of this nature.
Supporting Mentorship of Underrepresented Scholars in APSWe acknowledge that mentorship and outreach are essential for enhancing the recruitment, success, and retention of scholars from communities traditionally underrepresented, underserved, and/or subjected to marginalization (e.g., (31,32)). APS has a long history of supporting trainees from diverse backgrounds, including the Diversity Initiative Travel Awards Program, Mentor/Mentee Reception, APS Young Investigator Colloquium, and the recently established LGBT Health Scholar Trainee Award. At the 2022 roundtable, members suggested building on this programming by supporting professional development topics tailored to members from underrepresented communities at varying career stages, such as through the Emerging Leaders Initiative, greater support for racial/ethnic minority mentors, and training and dialogue opportunities for white mentors to enable them to better support mentees from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups. We have begun and seek to further develop an Open Science Framework project for collating and sharing resources for implementing antiracism in mentoring, professional development, scientific discourse, and research practice for scholars within and beyond APS (33). We are also working with past APS President Dr. Paige Green to lay the groundwork for engaging in outreach with students and faculty at Minority-Serving Institutions (Box 1).
Longer term, we seek to participate in conversations with APS leadership about complex issues related to the broader social impact of antiracism such as reevaluating the society’s fiscal investment strategies.
CONCLUSIONSIn pledging to be an antiracist organization, the APS formed the ARTF to help identify different manifestations of systemic racism within the society and to make recommendations for building a more inclusive and equitable professional organization. In this article, we shared the activities from the task force’s first year with the goals of maximum transparency to APS membership, as well as sharing resources and lessons learned to other professional societies and academic groups who seek to incorporate antiracism principles in their practices. We also highlighted goals and intentions for continuing to promote the work of antiracism as an ongoing process within the organization. We note that, although some of our activities will have immediate impact (i.e., bylaw changes), the impact of others will only emerge over time. To that end, our task force can help APS leadership consider how organizations measure progress in antiracism. Our hope is that this article can both serve as a historical marker of this effort and add to the broader social conversation about these challenging and critical issues, for our own organization and others. We are optimistic about the future and are honored to have been given this important opportunity to engage in antiracism for our scientific society.
We thank the American Psychosomatic Society for supporting this work and Laura Degnon, Sarah Shiffert, and Connie MacKay for their support of antiracism efforts and administrative support.
All authors contributed equally and are listed alphabetically. This article was written by the Members of the American Psychosomatic Society Antiracism Task Force. This article does not represent an official position of the American Psychosomatic Society.
Source of Funding and Conflicts of Interest: There was no funding received for the writing of this manuscript. The authors do not have any conflicts of interest to report.
REFERENCES 1. Historical Chronology: Examining Psychology’s Contributions to the Belief in Racial Hierarchy and Perpetuation of Inequality for People of Color in the U.S. [Internet]. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2021. Available at: https://www.apa.org/about/apa/addressing-racism/historical-chronology. Accessed December 19, 2022. 2. Roberts SO, Bareket-Shavit C, Dollins FA, Goldie PD, Mortenson E. Racial inequality in psychological research: trends of the past and recommendations for the future. Perspect Psychol Sci 2020;15:1295–309. 3. A Statement on Anti-Racism [Internet]. American Academy of Arts & Sciences. Available at: https://www.amacad.org/anti-racism-statement. Accessed February 7, 2023. 4. Lundebjerg NE, Medina-Walpole AM. Future forward: AGS initiative addressing intersection of structural racism and ageism in health care. J Am Geriatr Soc 2021;69:892–5. 5. The Society of Behavioral Medicine (SBM) Urges Congress to Reform Policing and Increase Funding for Anti-Racist Research [Internet]. Milwaukee, WI: Society of Behavioral Medicine; 2020. Available at: https://www.sbm.org/UserFiles/file/SBM%20Position%20Statement%20on%20Racism%20and%20Police%20Brutality.pdf. 6. 2021–2022 Progress Report [Internet]. UNITE Working Group. 2022. Available at: https://www.nih.gov/ending-structural-racism. Accessed September 1, 2022. 7. American Psychosomatic Society. APS Statement Against Racism [Internet]. Available at: https://psychosomatic.org/aps-statement-against-racism/. Accessed February 7, 2023. 8. Kendi IX. How to be an Antiracist. New York, NY: One World; 2019. 9. King DD, Hall AV, Johnson L, Carter J, Burrows D, Samuel N. Research on anti-Black racism in organizations: insights, ideas, and considerations. J Bus Psychol 2023;38:145–62. 10. Sexton SM, Richardson CR, Schrager SB, Bowman MA, Hickner J, Morley CP, et al. Systemic racism and health disparities: statement from editors of family medicine journals. Can Fam Physician 2021;67:13–4. 11. Buscemi J, Bennett GG, Gorin SS, Pagoto SL, Sallis JF, Wilson DK, et al. A 6-year update of the health policy and advocacy priorities of the Society of Behavioral Medicine. Transl Behav Med 2017;7:903–11. 12. Kang S. The optimal size of committee. J Econ Res 2004;9:217–38. 13. Sue DW, Alsaidi S, Awad MN, Glaeser E, Calle CZ, Mendez N. Disarming racial microaggressions: microintervention strategies for targets, White allies, and bystanders. Am Psychol 2019;74:128–42. 14. Boyd RW, Lindo EG, Weeks LD, McLemore MR. On racism: a new standard for publishing on racial health inequities. Health Aff Forefr [Internet]. Available at: https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/forefront.20200630.939347/full/. Accessed February 7, 2023. 15. Chaudhary VB, Berhe AA. Ten simple rules for building an antiracist lab. PLoS Comput Biol 2020;16:e1008210. 16. Buchanan NT, Perez M, Prinstein MJ, Thurston IB. Upending racism in psychological science: strategies to change how science is conducted, reported, reviewed, and disseminated. Am Psychol 2021;76:1097–112. 17. Neville HA, Ruedas-Gracia N, Lee BA, Ogunfemi N, Maghsoodi AH, Mosley DV, et al. The public psychology for liberation training model: a call to transform the discipline. Am Psychol 2021;76:1248–65. 18. Breland JY, Stanton MV. Anti-Black racism and behavioral medicine: confronting the past to envision the future. Transl Behav Med 2022;12:ibab090. 19. Center for MSIs. List of Minority Serving Institutions 2022 [Internet]. Available at: https://cmsi.gse.rutgers.edu/sites/default/files/2022%20MSI%20List.pdf. 20. Daniszewski J. AP Definitive Source | The decision to capitalize Black [Internet]. 2020. Available at: https://blog.ap.org/announcements/the-decision-to-capitalize-black. Accessed February 7, 2023. 21. Daniszewski J. AP Definitive Source | Why we will lowercase white [Internet]. 2020. Available at: https://blog.ap.org/announcements/why-we-will-lowercase-white. Accessed February 7, 2023. 22. Mayer C, Sivatheerthan T, Mütze-Niewöhner S, Nitsch V. Sharing leadership behaviors in virtual teams: effects of shared leadership behaviors on team member satisfaction and productivity. Team Perform Manag 2023;29:90–112. 23. Oluo I. So You Want to Talk About Race. Seattle, WA: Seal Press; 2019. 24. Jana DT. The Differences Between Allies, Accomplices & Co-Conspirators May Surprise You [Internet]. Medium 2022. Available at: https://aninjusticemag.com/the-differences-between-allies-accomplices-co-conspirators-may-surprise-you-d3fc7fe29c. Accessed March 30, 2023. 25. Perkel JM. How scientists use Slack. Nature 2017;541:123–4. 26. Slack. About Us [Internet]. Slack. Available at: https://slack.com/about. Accessed February 7, 2023. 27. Gewin V. The time tax put on scientists of colour. Nature 2020;583:479–81. 28. APS Statement on Anti-Asian Violence [Internet]. American Psychosomatic Society. Available at: https://psychosomatic.org/aps-statement-on-anti-asian-violence/. Accessed February 7, 2023 29. National Institutes of Health. NOT-OD-21-066: Request for Information (RFI): Inviting Comments and Suggestions to Advance and Strengthen Racial Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in the Biomedical Research Workforce and Advance Health Disparities and Health Equity Research [Internet]. Available at: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-21-066.html. Accessed February 7, 2023. 30. American Psychosomatic Society. APS Young Investigator Colloquium [Internet]. Available at: https://psychosomatic.org/award/aps-young-investigator-colloquium/. Accessed February 7, 2023. 31. Rogers MR, Molina LE. Exemplary efforts in psychology to recruit and retain graduate students of color. Am Psychol 2006;61:143–56. 32. Maton KI, Wimms HE, Grant SK, Wittig MA, Rogers MR, Vasquez MJT. Experiences and perspectives of African American, Latina/o, Asian American, and European American psychology graduate students: a national study. Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol 2011;17:68–78. 33. Anti-Racism Resource Repository [Internet]. doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/29DHJ.
留言 (0)