What American psychology needs most is the majority world: Reply to Webster et al. (2021).

Webster and team's (2021) extension of our analysis to look at more journals over a longer time period suggests a slightly quicker trend away from Americanness in psychological journals than we found. However, they make a purely binary distinction between American and not American and do not address whether the change they document includes the most relevant increase in representation: that from the majority world. Overall we concur that the pace of change is slow and that our science would be benefited by increased attention to internationalization.

On the Dynamics of the Psychosocial Work Environment and Employee Well-Being: A Latent Transition Approach.

The current study investigates employee well-being in stable versus changing psychosocial working conditions, using the Job Demand-Control theoretical framework. It thereby addresses a gap in the literature dealing with how the dynamics of the work environment may affect different aspects of well-being, such as job satisfaction, work stress, mental health complaints, and overall quality of life. The study was carried out on a large heterogeneous sample of employees in Switzerland ( = 959) and was based on two measurement points.

The neglected 95% revisited: Is American psychology becoming less American?

The field of psychology prides itself on being a data-driven science. In 2008, however, Arnett brought to light a major weakness in the evidence on which models, measures, and theories in psychology rest. He demonstrated that the most prominent journals in six subdisciplines of psychology focused almost exclusively (over 70% of samples and authors) on a cultural context, the United States, shared by only 5% of the world's population.