Gardner, Ryan, and Snoeyink (2018) provided an excellent and much-needed analysis of the status of women in industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology. Although others have produced overall assessments of the status of women in psychology (Eagly & Riger, 2014; Kite et al., 2001), these are not sufficient to identify conditions within the subfields of psychology. As shown by statistics on the divisions of the American Psychological Association (http://www.apa.org/about/division/officers/services/profiles.aspx), the subfields differ greatly in their gender balance, with some being male dominated (e.g., experimental and cognitive science), others female dominated (e.g., developmental psychology), and still others representing women and men more equally (e.g., social and personality psychology). I-O psychology is among the more gender-balanced fields, with an increasing proportion of women over time. It would seem that I-O's gradual inclusion of more women should have changed aspects of research and discourse in this field. In this comment, we argue that these women have produced impressive changes.

中文翻译：

---

超越女性在 IO 中的代表以产生性别包容性知识

Gardner、Ryan 和 Snoeyink (2018) 对女性在工业和组织 (IO) 心理学中的地位进行了出色且急需的分析。尽管其他人对女性在心理学领域的地位进行了全面评估（Eagly & Riger, 2014; Kite et al., 2001），但这些不足以确定心理学子领域内的条件。美国心理学会各部门的统计数据显示（http://www.apa.org/about/division/officers/services/profiles.aspx)，这些子领域的性别平衡差异很大，一些是男性主导的（例如，实验和认知科学），另一些是女性主导的（例如，发展心理学），还有一些更平等地代表女性和男性（例如，社会和个性心理学）。IO 心理学是性别更平衡的领域之一，随着时间的推移，女性的比例越来越高。似乎 IO 逐渐纳入更多女性应该改变了该领域的研究和讨论的各个方面。在这篇评论中，我们认为这些女性已经产生了令人印象深刻的变化。