@article{SyedSantosYooetal.2017, author = {Syed, Moin and Santos, Carlos and Yoo, Hyung Chol and Juang, Linda P.}, title = {Invisibility of racial/ethnic minorities in developmental science}, series = {American Psychologist}, volume = {73}, journal = {American Psychologist}, number = {6}, publisher = {American Psychological Association}, address = {Washington}, issn = {0003-066X}, doi = {10.1037/amp0000294}, pages = {812 -- 826}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Garc{\´i}a Coll et al.'s (1996)integrative model was a landmark article for developmentalscience, and for psychology more broadly, in outlining the multitude of social and culturalfactors at play when seeking to understand the development of racial/ethnic minority children.The time is ripe to not only take stock of those advances but also evaluate the integrativemodel in the context of present-day research practice within developmental psychology, andpsychology more broadly. The purpose of this article is to bring a systemic perspective todevelopmental science through a discussion of current practices in the field. To do so, weexamineinvisibility, or how dominant practices serve to overlook, silence, or dismissknowledge produced by and for racial/ethnic minority populations. Guided by the interpretiveframework of intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1991), we discuss three key questions: Fromwhose vantage point is research conducted? What types of questions are valued? And whogets left out? We then conclude with recommendations for changes in practices for individ-uals, institutions, and the field at large. Importantly, although our analysis is largely groundedin research and practices in developmental psychology, it is also highly relevant to psycho-logical science as a whole.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{SantosBruss2020, author = {Santos Bruss, Sara Morais dos}, title = {Feminist solidarities after modulation}, publisher = {punctum books}, address = {Brooklyn, NY}, isbn = {978-1-68571-146-7}, doi = {10.53288/0397.1.00}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xiii, 380}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Feminist Solidarities after Modulation produces an intersectional analysis of transnational feminist movements and their contemporary digital frameworks of identity and solidarity. Engaging media theory, critical race theory, and Black feminist theory, as well as contemporary feminist movements, this book argues that digital feminist interventions map themselves onto and make use of the multiplicity and ambiguity of digital spaces to question presentist and fixed notions of the internet as a white space and technologies in general as objective or universal. Understanding these frameworks as colonial constructions of the human, identity is traced to a socio-material condition that emerges with the modernity/colonialism binary. In the colonial moment, race and gender become the reasons for, as well as the effects of, technologies of identification, and thus need to be understood as and through technologies. What Deleuze has called modulation is not a present modality of control, but is placed into a longer genealogy of imperial division, which stands in opposition to feminist, queer, and anti-racist activism that insists on non-modular solidarities across seeming difference. At its heart, Feminist Solidarities after Modulation provides an analysis of contemporary digital feminist solidarities, which not only work at revealing the material histories and affective ""leakages"" of modular governance, but also challenges them to concentrate on forms of political togetherness that exceed a reductive or essentialist understanding of identity, solidarity, and difference.}, language = {en} } @misc{MoffittJuangSyed2020, author = {Moffitt, Ursula Elinor and Juang, Linda P. and Syed, Moin}, title = {Intersectionality and Youth Identity Development Research in Europe}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {613}, issn = {1866-8364}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-45979}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-459790}, pages = {16}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The increasing application of intersectionality to the psychological study of identity development raises questions regarding how we as researchers construct and operationalize social identity categories, as well as how we best capture and address systems of oppression and privilege within our work. In the continental European context, the use of the intersectionality paradigm raises additional issues, since "race" was officially removed from the vernacular following the atrocities of WWII, yet racialized oppression continues to occur at every level of society. Within psychological research, participants are often divided into those with and without "migration background," which can reiterate inequitable norms of national belonging while washing over salient lived experiences in relation to generation status, citizenship, religion, gender, and the intersection between these and other social locations. Although discrimination is increasingly examined in identity development research, rarely are the history and impact of colonialism and related socio-historical elements acknowledged. In the current paper, we aim to address these issues by reviewing previous research and discussing theoretical and practical possibilities for the future. In doing so, we delve into the problems of trading in one static social identity category (e.g., "race") for another (e.g., "migration background/migrant") without examining the power structures inherent in the creation of these top-down categories, or the lived experiences of those navigating what it means to be marked as a racialized Other. Focusing primarily on contextualized ethno-cultural identity development, we discuss relevant examples from the continental European context, highlighting research gaps, points for improvement, and best practices.}, language = {en} } @article{MoffittJuangSyed2020, author = {Moffitt, Ursula Elinor and Juang, Linda P. and Syed, Moin}, title = {Intersectionality and Youth Identity Development Research in Europe}, series = {Frontiers in Psychology}, volume = {11}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation}, address = {Lausanne}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00078}, pages = {14}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The increasing application of intersectionality to the psychological study of identity development raises questions regarding how we as researchers construct and operationalize social identity categories, as well as how we best capture and address systems of oppression and privilege within our work. In the continental European context, the use of the intersectionality paradigm raises additional issues, since "race" was officially removed from the vernacular following the atrocities of WWII, yet racialized oppression continues to occur at every level of society. Within psychological research, participants are often divided into those with and without "migration background," which can reiterate inequitable norms of national belonging while washing over salient lived experiences in relation to generation status, citizenship, religion, gender, and the intersection between these and other social locations. Although discrimination is increasingly examined in identity development research, rarely are the history and impact of colonialism and related socio-historical elements acknowledged. In the current paper, we aim to address these issues by reviewing previous research and discussing theoretical and practical possibilities for the future. In doing so, we delve into the problems of trading in one static social identity category (e.g., "race") for another (e.g., "migration background/migrant") without examining the power structures inherent in the creation of these top-down categories, or the lived experiences of those navigating what it means to be marked as a racialized Other. Focusing primarily on contextualized ethno-cultural identity development, we discuss relevant examples from the continental European context, highlighting research gaps, points for improvement, and best practices.}, language = {en} }