Generic Language and Reporting Practices in Developmental Journals: Implications for Facilitating a More Representative Cognitive Developmental Science

As in other subfields of psychology, developmental science faces a long-standing problem of limited diversity in research participants. This issue especially raises concerns when researchers make unwarranted broad claims about their results, such as using generic language that implies that a finding is unvarying and applies across participants and contexts. Variation in editorial practices may contribute to the extent to which generic language is used or how much information is provided about participant demographics. The present study expands on an existing corpus of articles published in developmental psychology journals and examines the extent to which generic language differed by journal and sample characteristics (such as racial/ethnic diversity or sample size). We observed widespread use of generic language: 73% of articles included at least one generic statement in article components that were coded (i.e. titles, highlights, and abstracts). However, differences across journals were observed: Articles published in Developmental Science and JECP (which require authors to include short research highlights) tended to have higher rates of generic language than articles published in Child Development and Developmental Psychology (which did not require highlights). Articles that fully reported sample race and ethnicity also included fewer generic statements to describe their results than articles with more incomplete reporting. We conclude by highlighting the importance of editorial policies in shaping scholarship, as well as challenges and opportunities for researchers to consider when reporting demographic information in a global field and clearly and accurately communicating the importance of research findings.