Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain
the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in
Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles
and JavaScript.
Minoritized doctoral students are subject to cultural taxation — disproportionate expectations and obligations based on their race or ethnicity — that negatively impacts their PhD studies. Faculty members and departments should counteract this taxation to support students of colour.
The current system of peer review drives racial and gender disparities in publication and funding outcomes and can suppress the perspectives of marginalized scholars. Established researchers have an opportunity to help to build a fairer and more inclusive peer review culture by advocating for and empowering their trainees.
Who will achieve high marks in school, flourish in their career or become an Olympian? Current theories of achievement provide answers that are intuitively appealing but scientifically flawed. Consequently, most of what people believe about how to achieve success is likely to be incorrect.
Two articles in Nature Reviews Psychology propose a resilience-based approach to mental health outcomes that shifts attention from a binary view of psychopathology to diversity.
The standard associative account of implicit bias posits that the mind unavoidably mirrors the biased co-occurrences present in the environment. The resulting fatalistic view of implicit bias as inevitable and immutable is both scientifically unwarranted and societally counterproductive.
All Nature Reviews Psychology articles are edited for clarity and consistency prior to publication. We encourage researchers to devote the same attention to precision when writing their empirical papers.