Whose Signals Are Being Amplified? Toward a More Equitable Clinical Psychophysiology

Abstract

Research using psychophysiological methods holds great promise for refining clinical assessment, identifying risk factors, and informing treatment. Unfortunately, unique methodological features of existing approaches limit inclusive research participation and, consequently, generalizability. This brief overview and commentary provides a snapshot of the current state of representation in clinical psychophysiology, with a focus on the forms and consequences of ongoing exclusion of Black participants. We illustrate issues of inequity and exclusion that are unique to clinical psychophysiology, considering intersections among social constructions of Blackness and biased design of current technology used to measure electroencephalography, skin conductance, and other signals. We then highlight work by groups dedicated to quantifying and addressing these limitations. We discuss the need for reflection and input from a wider variety of stakeholders to develop and refine new technologies, given the risk of further widening disparities. Finally, we provide broad recommendations for clinical psychophysiology research.

Figure 1.

Participant demographics among the 13.8% of Psychophysiology articles that reported sample race and ethnicity. Vertical black lines refer to the median percentage of each race/ethnicity across included articles. Of note, medians are presented due to the clear overdispersion of percentage of races and ethnicities; medians will often not sum to 100%. ‘Another Race’ includes all races not included in the listed categories, including biracial/multiracial individuals.

Figure 2.

Participant demographics among the 50.4% of Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science (JPCS; formerly Journal of Abnormal Psychology) articles that reported sample race and ethnicity. Vertical black lines refer to the median percentage of each race/ethnicity across included articles. Of note, medians are presented due to the clear overdispersion of percentage of races and ethnicities; medians will often not sum to 100%. ‘Another Race’ includes all races not included in the listed categories, including biracial/multiracial individuals.

Figure 3.

Participant demographics among the 74.5% of Clinical Psychological Science (CPS) articles that reported sample race and ethnicity. Vertical black lines refer to the median percentage of each race/ethnicity across included articles. Of note, medians are presented due to the clear overdispersion of percentage of races and ethnicities; medians will often not sum to 100%. ‘Another Race’ includes all races not included in the listed categories, including biracial/multiracial individuals.