As efforts to end systemic racism gain momentum across various contexts, it is critical to consider antiracist steps needed to improve psychological science. Current scientific practices may serve to maintain white supremacy with significant and impactful consequences. Extant research practices reinforce norms of homogeneity within BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color) populations, segregate theories, and methods derived from BIPOC groups, apply disparate standards to the evaluation of research on white versus BIPOC populations, and discourage BIPOC scholars from pursuing research careers. Perhaps consequently, disparities persist on a range of psychologically relevant outcomes (e.g., mental and physical health). This article presents examples of how epistemic oppression exists within psychological science, including in how science is conducted, reported, reviewed, and disseminated. This article offers a needed contribution by providing specific concrete recommendations for different stakeholders, including those involved in the production, reporting, and gatekeeping of science as well as consumers of science. Additionally, a discussion of accountability steps are offered to ensure that psychological science moves beyond talk and toward action, with possible strategies to measure outcomes, stimulate progress, promote dialogue and action, challenge inequity, and upend the influence of white supremacy in psychological science. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

While risk factors associated with IPV are well-researched, little is known about factors related to resilient functioning, especially among minority populations. Knowledge gained from this study can advance the field of violence research by its identification of potentially mutable variables related to resilience. Such research could be applied to developing strength-based interventions for at-risk populations of violence-exposed women.

Parents play a central role in utilization of mental health services by their children. This study explored the relationship between parents' recognition of child mental health problems and their decisions to seek help. Participants included 251 parents (49% Black, 51% White; 49% fathers, 51% mothers) recruited from community settings. Parents ranged in age from 20 to 66 years old with at least one child between ages 2 and 21. Parents read three vignettes that described a child with an anxiety disorder, ADHD, and no clinically significant diagnosis. Parents completed measures of problem recognition, perception of need, willingness to seek help, and beliefs about causes of mental illness. Findings from Generalized Estimating Equations revealed that parents were more likely to report intentions to seek help when they recognized a problem (odds ratio [OR] = 41.35, p < .001), 95% confidence interval (CI) [14.81, 115.49]; when it was an externalizing problem (OR = 1.85, p < .05), 95% CI [1.14, 3.02]; and when parents were older (OR = 1.04, p < .05), 95% CI [1.01, 1.08]. Predictors of parental problem recognition included perceived need, prior experience with mental illness, and belief in trauma as a cause of mental illness. Predictors of help-seeking intentions included problem recognition, perceived need, externalizing problem type, and being female. Given the relationship between parental problem recognition and willingness to seek help, findings suggest that efforts to address disparities in mental health utilization could focus on problem-specific, gender-sensitive, mutable factors such as helping parents value help-seeking for internalizing as well as externalizing problems.

This introduction to the special issue on Addressing Health Disparities in Pediatric Psychology provides context for why this special issue is needed, reviews key findings of the accepted articles, and discusses future directions for advancing the field. This special issue, one of three on this topic area that has been put forth in the history of this journal, comes at a critical point in our world. This is a time when the COVID-19 pandemic is systematically infecting Black, Indigenous, and People of Color and when there has been increased attention to systemic racism and intersecting violence inherent in multiple systems, including the justice, health, and educational systems. Using Kilbourne et al. (2016) framework, this special issue focuses on Phase 2 and Phase 3 research. Rather than only identifying health disparities (Phase 1), this issue focuses on understanding mechanisms and translating such understanding into interventions and policy changes. The accepted articles span a wide gamut from obesity to autism to rural populations. Furthermore, the articles provide methods for advancing the field beyond simply noting that systematic differences exist toward strategies to address these inequities. We conclude this introduction by discussing next steps for future research, with hopes that it inspires the next generation to study issues of disparities and inequity in deeper, more meaningful, and impactful ways.