•  
  •  
 

Abstract

The dominance of "WEIRD" (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) authors might indicate significant differences in research practices between them and non-WEIRD researchers or highlight issues such as inequality and publishing bias. In this survey, using a convenience sample of researchers worldwide (N = 72), we examined current research practices and researchers' views on the feasibility of advancements in employed methodologies among and between researchers in both WEIRD and Non-WEIRD countries. Our results showed that research practices are fairly uniform across cultures, by researchers commonly relying on (student) convenience samples, using statistical packages such as SPSS and R, utilizing low-cost equipment, publishing once to five times a year, and contributing as reviewers and journal editors. Only significant differences were observed between WEIRD and Non-WEIRD researchers related to institutional support, such as opportunities for statistical consultancy and funding prospects. Respondents were supportive regarding progress in research practices, but cautioned that further developments might exacerbate existing inequalities, particularly at smaller and less funded institutions. Our main conclusion is that the visibility and outreach gap between WEIRD and non WEIRD researchers is primarily caused by systemic issues, rather than due to differences in research practices.

References

Arnett, J. J. (2008). The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs to become less American. American Psychologist, 63(7), 602–614. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.63.7.602

Bergkamp, J., McIntyre, K. A., & Hauser, M. (2023). An uncomfortable tension: Reconciling the principles of forensic psychology and cultural competency. Law and Human Behavior, 47(1), 233–248. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000507

Berry, J. W. (2022). The forgotten field: Contexts for cross-cultural psychology. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 53(7-8), 993-1009. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220221221093810

Boskovic, I., van der Heide, D., Hope, L., Merckelbach, H., & Jelicic, M. (2017). Plausibility judgments of atypical symptoms across cultures: An explorative study among Western and Non-Western experts. Psychological Injury & Law, 10(3), 274-281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-017-9294-6

Breeze, R. (2015). Citing outside the community? An investigation of the language of bibliography in top journals. In R. Plo Alastrué & C. Pérez-Llantada (Ed.), Volume 2 English as a Scientific and Research Language: Debates and DiscoursesEnglish in Europe, Volume 2 (pp. 37-58). Berlin, München, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614516378-005

Broesch, T., Crittenden, A. N., Beheim, B. A., Blackwell, A. D., Bunce, J. A., Colleran, H., Hagel, K., Kline, M., McElreath, R., Nelson, R. G., Pisor, A. C., Prall, S., Pretelli, I., Purzycki, B., Quinn, E. A., Ross, C., Scelza, B., Starkweather, K., Stieglitz, J., & Borgerhoff Mulder, M. (2020). Navigating cross-cultural research: Methodological and ethical considerations. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 287(1935), 20201245. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2020.1245

Delgado, A. K., Holliday, R., Maguen, S., & Holder, N. (2025). Culturally considerate trauma-focused post-traumatic stress disorder treatment in Latine/x populations: A scoping review. Healthcare, 13(5), 469-489. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13050469

Dixon, L. E., Ahles, E., & Marques, L. (2016). Treating posttraumatic stress disorder in diverse settings: Recent advances and challenges for the future. Current Psychiatry Reports, 18(12), 108-125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-016-0746-6

Du, J. S. (2022, June 1). Opinion: Is open access worth the cost? The Scientist. https://www.the-scientist.com/opinion-is-open-access-worth-the-cost-70049

Dückers, M. L., Alisic, E., & Brewin, C. R. (2016). A vulnerability paradox in the cross-national prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder. The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science, 209(4), 300–305. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.115.176628

Duncan, N., & Bowman, B. (2009). Liberating South African psychology: The legacy of racism and the pursuit of representative knowledge production. In M. Montero & C. C. Sonn (Eds.), Psychology of liberation: Theory and applications (pp. 93–113). Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85784-8_5

Fussy, D. S. (2019). The hurdles to fostering research in Tanzanian universities. Higher Education, 77(2), 283-299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0276-8

GDP (current US$). World Bank Open Data. (n.d.). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD

Hagger, M. S. (2022). Developing an open science ‘mindset’. Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine, 10(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/21642850.2021.2012474

Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). Beyond WEIRD: Towards a broad-based behavioral science. Behavioral and brain sciences, 33(2-3), 111-120. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X10000725

Hruschka, D. J., et al. (2018). Pressing questions in the study of psychological and behavioral diversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(45), 11366–11368. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1814733115

IDEAS/RePEc. Top countries and states, number of registered citing authors, weighted by rank (max. 1 per author). Retrieved from https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.country.rcauthors.html

Jin, H., Wang, Q., Yang, Y.-F., Zhang, H., Gao, M., Jin, S., Chen, Y., Xu, T., Zheng, Y.-R., Chen, J., Xiao, Q., Yang, J., Wang, X., Geng, H., Ge, J., Wang, W.-W., Chen, X., Zhang, L., Zuo, X.-N., & Hu, C.-P. (2023). The Chinese Open Science Network (COSN): Building an open science community from scratch. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 6(1), Article 25152459221144986. https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459221144986

Klein, R. A., Vianello, M., Hasselman, F., Adams, B. G., Adams, R. B., Alper, S., Aveyard, M., Axt, J. R., Babalola, M. T., Bahník, Š., Batra, R., Berkics, M., Bernstein, M. J., Berry, D. R., Bialobrzeska, O., Binan, E. D., Bocian, K., Brandt, M. J., Busching, R., Nosek, B. A. (2018). Many labs 2: Investigating variation in replicability across samples and settings. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(4), 443–490. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918810225

Lakens, D. (2024). When and how to deviate from a preregistration. Collabra: Psychology, 10(1), 117094. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.117094

Layde, J. B. (2004). Cross-cultural issues in forensic psychiatry training. Academic Psychiatry, 28(1), 34-39. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ap.28.1.34

Merten, T., & Rogers, R. (2017). An International Perspective on Feigned Mental Disabilities: Conceptual Issues and Continuing Controversies. Behavioral sciences & the law, 35(2), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2274

Muthukrishna, M., Bell, A. V., Henrich, J., Curtin, C. M., Gedranovich, A., McInerney, J., & Thue, B. (2020). Beyond Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) psychology: Measuring and mapping scales of cultural and psychological distance. Psychological Science, 31(6), 678-701. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620916782

Neal, T. M., & Grisso, T. (2014). Assessment practices and expert judgment methods in forensic psychology and psychiatry: An international snapshot. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 41(12), 1406-1421. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854814548449

Nijdam-Jones, A., & Rosenfeld, B. (2017). Cross-cultural feigning assessment: A systematic review of feigning instruments used with linguistically, ethnically, and culturally diverse samples. Psychological Assessment, 29(11), 1321–1336. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000438

Nosek, B. A., Hardwicke, T. E., Moshontz, H., Allard, A., Corker, K. S., Dreber, A., Fidler, F., et al. (2022). Replicability, robustness, and reproducibility in psychological science. Annual Review of Psychology, 73, 719-748. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-114157

Otgaar, H., Sagana, A., & Tupper, N. (2020). A brief reflection on Open Science. Psychological Research on Urban Society, 3(1), 8-13. https://doi.org/10.7454/proust.v3i1.85 proust.ui.ac.id

Phiri, P., Sajid, S., & Delanerolle, G. (2023). Decolonising the psychology curriculum: A perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1193241. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1193241.

Rad, M. S., M., Martingano, A. J., & Ginges, J. (2018). Toward a psychology of Homo sapiens: Making psychological science more representative of the human population. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(45), 11401-11405. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1721165115

Tam, K. P., & Milfont, T. L. (2020). Towards cross-cultural environmental psychology: A state-of-the-art review and recommendations. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 71, 101474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101474

Tight, M. (2008). Higher education research as tribe, territory and/or community: A co-citation analysis. Higher Education, 55, 593-605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-007-9077-1

Urassa, M., Lawson, D. W., & Wamoyi, J. (2021). Cross-cultural research must prioritize equitable collaboration. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 668–671. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01076-x

Weiss, R. A., & Rosenfeld, B. (2012). Navigating cross-cultural issues in forensic assessment: Recommendations for practice. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 43(3), 234–240. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025850

Widows, M. R., & Smith, G. P. (2005). Structured inventory of malingered symptomatology professional manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Yuna, D., Xiaokun, L., Jianing, L., & Lu, H. (2022). Cross-cultural communication on social media: Review from the perspective of cultural psychology and neuroscience. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 858900. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.858900

Additional Files
Supplemental file.docx (20 kB)
supplemental table
Download

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.