Diversity and Intersectionality in Positive Psychology Research
This paper examines Rao and Donaldson's 2015 systematic review of positive psychology literature, published in Canadian Psychology, which analyzed 1,628 peer-reviewed articles spanning 1998 to 2014. The paper summarizes the review's findings regarding gender bias in authorship and research design, the underrepresentation of non-white subjects, and the near-absence of discussions about race, class, and intersectionality in the field. It also considers the broader context of positive psychology as a discipline and the authors' recommendations for making the field more inclusive and relevant to diverse populations.
- Introduction to the Systematic Review: Overview of Rao & Donaldson's 2015 literature review scope
- Positive Psychology and Its Social Context: Positive psychology's origins and multidisciplinary social relevance
- Gender Bias in Positive Psychology Research: Three gender bias concerns: design, authorship, topic selection
- Methodology and Key Findings: Content analysis of 1,628 articles confirms bias claims
- Recommendations for a More Inclusive Field: Proposals to apply positive psychology to diverse populations
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper accurately and concisely synthesizes the major findings of a single empirical source, demonstrating focused critical engagement with a peer-reviewed article.
- It contextualizes the source within the broader history of positive psychology, explaining why diversity gaps in the field are particularly significant given its multidisciplinary reach.
- The paper identifies specific sub-issues — authorship, research design, and topic selection — rather than treating gender bias as a monolithic concept, showing analytical precision.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates article-level critical summary: it does not merely report what the source says but organizes its findings into thematic categories (gender, race, intersectionality, methodology) and frames them within the broader disciplinary context of positive psychology's origins and social influence.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens by introducing the systematic review and its scope, then provides disciplinary background on positive psychology. It then narrows to the gender-specific findings, covers methodology and overall results, and closes with the authors' forward-looking recommendations. This funnel structure moves from context to specifics to implications.
Introduction to the Systematic Review
An article published in Canadian Psychology entitled "Expanding Opportunities for Diversity in Positive Psychology" presents the results of a systematic review of literature. The review covers the years between 1998 and 2014, spanning the bulk of the duration of the field of positive psychology. The purpose of the systematic review was to examine how issues related to race, class, and gender were addressed in positive psychology literature, in response to what the authors describe as a widespread perception that the field ignores these relevant concerns.
Findings of the systematic review were varied. They included an underrepresentation of female authors of peer-reviewed articles in the field, despite an overrepresentation of female participants in empirical research. Additionally, Rao and Donaldson (2015) found that discussions about gender, race, or ethnicity are nearly absent from positive psychology literature altogether. The bulk of research in the field is also focused on white subjects. In response to these findings, Rao and Donaldson (2015) note that by redefining and reframing positive psychology, it may be possible to move the field forward and make it more relevant to a broader community.
Positive Psychology and Its Social Context
Positive psychology itself emerged as a response to mainstream approaches in the field of psychology. Instead of focusing on what was wrong with a person or group — such as personality disorder, mood disorder, neurosis, or dysfunction — positive psychologists offered a way to focus on an individual's strengths and how that person can capitalize on those strengths to achieve specific goals, such as well-being. Positive psychology is a social science, but a multidisciplinary one with the potential to influence the schemas and worldviews dominating different disciplines.
This multidisciplinary reach is precisely why Rao and Donaldson (2015) urge positive psychologists to become more inclusive in their approach and to welcome discussions about race, class, gender, and power intersectionality. It could even be considered ironic that positive psychology has avoided frank discussions of intersectionality, given the field's capacity to positively influence public policy in areas such as health care, poverty alleviation, and environmental sustainability (Rao & Donaldson, 2015).
Gender Bias in Positive Psychology Research
Gender issues are addressed in a specific section of Rao and Donaldson's (2015) systematic review. The three main concerns regarding gender bias in positive psychology research involved research design, authorship, and selection of research topic. Research design issues included the biased selection of participants, with females being overrepresented in recent literature. Authorship issues refer directly to the lack of female primary researchers or authors in positive psychology research. The issue of gender in research topics concerns research questions that are androcentric — not sufficiently focused on women's perceptions of themselves or others, or on women's specific research concerns.
References
Rao, M. A., & Donaldson, S. I. (2015). Expanding opportunities for diversity in positive psychology. Canadian Psychology, 56(3), 271–282. Retrieved from EBSCO.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.