Skip to main content

A Best Practices Guide to Intersectional Approaches in Psychological Research

Abstract

This paper serves as a “best practices guide” for researchers interested in applying intersectionality theory to psychological research. Intersectionality, the mutually constitutive relations among social identities, presents several issues to researchers interested in applying it to research. I highlight three central issues and provide guidelines for how to address them. First, I discuss the constraints in the number of identities that researchers are able to test in an empirical study, and highlight relevant decision rules. Second, I discuss when to focus on “master” identities (e.g., gender) versus “emergent” identities (i.e., White lesbian). Third, I argue that treating identity as a process situated within social structural contexts facilitates the research process. I end with a brief discussion of the implications for the study of intersectionality.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Baca Zinn, M., & Thornton Dill, B. (1996). Theorizing difference from multiracial feminism. Feminist Studies, 22, 321–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowleg, L. (2008). When Black + Lesbian + Woman ≠ Black Lesbian Woman: the methodological challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality research. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • Browne, I. (Ed.). (1999). Latinas and African American women at work: Race, gender, and economic inequality. New York, NY: Russell Sage.

  • Burman, E. (2001). Minding the gap: Positivism, psychology and the politics of qualitative research. In D. Tolman, & M. Brydon-Miller (Eds.), From subjects to subjectivities: a handbook of interpretive and participatory methods (pp. 259–275). New York, NY: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, E. (2008). Coalitions as a model for intersectionality: from practice to theory. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crenshaw, K. W. (1994). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. In M.A. Fineman, & R. Mykitiuk (Eds.), The public nature of private violence (pp. 93–118). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, L., & Butterworth, M. (2008). Questioning gender and sexual identity: dynamic links over time. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • Dotson, L. A., Stinson, J., & Christian, L. (2003). “People tell me I can’t have sex”: Women with disabilities share their personal perspectives on health care, sexuality, and reproductive rights. In M.E. Banks, & E. Kaschak (Eds.), Women with visible and invisible disabilities: Multiple intersections, multiple issues, multiple therapies (pp. 195–210). Binghamton, NY: Haworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dottolo, A. L., & Stewart, A. L. (2008). “Don’t ever forget now, you’re a Black man in America”: Intersections of race, class and gender in encounters with the police. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • Ellison, R. (1995). Invisible man. New York, NY: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goff, P. A., Thomas, M. A., & Jackson, M. C. (2008). “Ain’t I a woman?”: towards an intersectional approach to person perception and group-based harms. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • Greenwood, R. M. (2008). Intersectional political consciousness: appreciation for intragroup differences and solidarity in diverse groups. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 36–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R. M., & Christian, A. (2008). What happens when we unpack the invisible knapsack? Intersectional political consciousness and inter-group appraisals. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • Hegarty, P., & Pratto, F. (2001). The effects of social category norms and stereotypes on explanations for intergroup differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 723–735.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegarty, P., & Pratto, F. (2004). The differences that norms make: empiricism, social constructionism and the interpretation of group differences. Sex Roles, 50, 445–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helms, J. E., Jernigan, M., & Mascher, J. (2005). The meaning of race in psychology and how to change it: a methodological perspective. The American Psychologist, 60, 27–36.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, U., Beupre, M. G., & Cheun, N. (2002). Who to whom and why: Cultural differences and similarities in the function of smiles. In M.H. Abel (Ed.), An empirical reflection on the smile. Mellen studies in psychology, Vol. 4 (pp. 187–216). Lewiston, NY: Mellen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurtado, A., & Sinha, M. (2008). More than men: Latino feminist masculinities and intersectionality. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • Kunda, Z., Miller, D. T., & Claire, T. (1990). Combining social concepts: the role of causal reasoning. Cognitive Science, 14, 551–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landrine, H. (1985). Race x class stereotypes of women. Sex Roles, 13, 65–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahalingam, R., Balan, S., & Haritatos, J. (2008). Engendering immigrant psychology: an intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • Mahalingam, R., & Leu, J. (2005). Culture, essentialism, immigration, and representations of gender. Theory & Psychology, 15, 839–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marecek, J., Fine, M., & Kidder, L. (2001). Working between worlds: qualitative methods and social psychology. The Journal of Social Issues, 53, 631–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattis, J., Grayman, N., Cowie, S., Winston, C., Watson, C., & Jackson, D. (2008). Intersectional identities and the politics of altruistic care in a low-income, urban community. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs, 30, 1771–1800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McIntosh, P. (1990). White privilege: unpacking the invisible knapsack. Independent School, 49, 31–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, T. (1993). Playing in the Dark: Whiteness and the Literary Imagination. New York, NY: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakano Glenn, E. (1999). The social construction and institutionalization of gender and race: an integrative framework. In M. M. Ferree, J. Lorber, & B. Hess (Eds.), Revisioning Gender (pp. 3–43). London, UK: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phoenix, A. (2006). Intersectionality. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 13, 187–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purdie-Vaughns, V., & Eibach, R. P. (2008). Intersectional invisibility: The ideological sources and social consequences of the non-prototypicality of intersectional subordinates. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • Ringrose, J. (2007). Troubling agency and ‘choice’: a psychosocial analysis of students’ negotiations of Black Feminist ‘intersectionality’ discourses in Women’s Studies. Women’s Studies International Forum, 30, 264–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risman, B. J. (2004). Gender as a social structure: theory wrestling with activism. Gender & Society, 18, 429–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, D. J. (2005). The psychology of stereotyping. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shields, S. A. (2008). Gender: an intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • Stewart, A. J., & McDermott, C. (2004). Gender in psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 519–544.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded Theory methodology: an overview. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 1–18). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sue, D. W., Bingham, R. P., Porche Burke, L., & Vasquez, M. (1999). The diversification of psychology: a multicultural revolution. The American Psychologist, 54, 1061–1069.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Townsend, T. G. (2008). Protecting our daughters: intersection of race, class and gender in African American mothers’ socialization of their daughters’ heterosexuality. Sex Roles, this issue.

  • Valentine, G. (2007). Theorizing and researching intersectionality: a challenge for feminist geography. The Professional Geographer, 59, 10–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, L. (2004). A conceptual framework for understanding race, class, gender, and sexuality. In S. N. Hesse-Biber, & M. L. Yaiser (Eds.), Feminist perspectives on social research (pp. 121–139). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weldon, S. L. (2005). Rethinking intersectionality: Some conceptual problems and solutions for the comparative study of welfare states. Paper delivered at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC, USA. Retrieved November 4, 2007, from http://www.asu.edu/clas/polisci/cqrm/APSA2005/Weldon_Intersectionality.pdf.

  • West, C., & Fenstermaker, S. (1997). Doing difference. In S. Fenstermaker, & C. West (Eds.), Doing gender, doing difference (pp. 55–81). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. M. (2004). Gender as seriality: thinking about women as a social collective. Signs, 19, 713–738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuval-Davis, N. (2006). Intersectionality and feminist politics. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 13, 193–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leah R. Warner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Warner, L.R. A Best Practices Guide to Intersectional Approaches in Psychological Research. Sex Roles 59, 454–463 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9504-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9504-5

Keywords

  • Intersectionality
  • Identity
  • Women’s studies
  • Feminist
  • Methodology