I would like to say that I believe inclusivity is different to but obviously very relevant to diversity. Inclusivity is things like not
-
-
forming cliques, not bullying, not excluding others for a reason other than them being exclusionary themselves, and on. And all these nots
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
are active nots. I mean actively stopping bullying, actively disruption exclusionary cliques, actively including people who do not feel as
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
welcome as white cis hetero males do in science, etc.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Does it, in your view, also include idea of involving communities affected by research in the research, so as to ensure relevance but also
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
to prevent 'othering' and false 'neutrality'. I think for instance of research involving autistic ppl and trans or otherwise gender
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @o_guest
Involving communities... how? At what level?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
For instance, like
@SueReviews does. Let me look for a recent post from her PhD on this.2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @twitemp1 and
Iris van Rooij Retweeted Cameron Maitland
Iris van Rooij added,
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @IrisVanRooij @twitemp1 and
Iris van Rooij Retweeted Eilidh Cage
Also see this example:https://twitter.com/dreilidh/status/902820348395233280 …
Iris van Rooij added,
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
Obviously if the lab has a name the participants like, they are more likely to be willing participants in the research.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.