Is doing better science enough?: An autoethnographic study of a multidisciplinary collaboration to measure structural racism

OBJECTIVES: Addressing structural racism remains a critical challenge in population health and social sciences, as traditional quantitative approaches often fail to disrupt long-standing racialized health hierarchies. This study critically interrogates the process of a multidisciplinary scientific collaboration attempting to operationalize and measure life course structural racism while enacting an anti-racist praxis. DESIGN: Utilizing a collaborative analytic autoethnography framework grounded in social cognitive theory and anti-racist praxis, our team - comprising biostatisticians, nurse scientists, epidemiologists, gerontologists, social scientists, and a nephrologist across racialized groups, career stages, and institutions - treated our team process as a socio-analytical field site. We examined the tension between individualistic paradigms and systemic measurement, gathering qualitative field data from team deliberations, and a dedicated focus group. RESULTS: Three primary autoethnographic themes emerged: operationalizing and understanding structural racism, constructing methodological infrastructure, and navigating accountability and the pursuit of a multidimensional measure. While qualitative life-course history interviews, expert panels, public podcasts, and a national survey advanced conceptual and data infrastructure, significant methodological barriers - including historical address recall, geocoding missingness, and geographic mismatch - prevented immediate measure validation. Autoethnographic reflection revealed how institutional incentives, capitalistic academic pressures, and funding mechanisms complicate collective equity work. CONCLUSION: By interrogating our collaborative process, we demonstrate that doing 'different science' requires prioritizing reflexive, collective team dynamics and infrastructure over rapid measure production. Embedding anti-racist praxis and community accountability into scientific collaborations offers a transformative pathway for advancing structural racism research and dismantling systemic health inequities.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ethnicity and Health
Published
2026-09-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/13557858.2026.2729315
Primary Topic
Race, Genetics, and Society
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Is doing better science enough?: An autoethnographic study of a multidisciplinary collaboration to measure structural racism

Paris B. Adkins‐Jackson, Laura Samuel, Alicia Cooke, Sarah L. Szanton et al.
Ethnicity and Health
Race, Genetics, and Society
article

Is doing better science enough?: An autoethnographic study of a multidisciplinary collaboration to measure structural racism

Paris B. Adkins‐Jackson, Laura Samuel, Alicia Cooke, Sarah L. Szanton, Deidra C. Crews, Emily A. Haozous, Odis Johnson, Darnell Leatherwood, Erik Westlund, Sierra Grey-Coker, Gilbert Gee, Roland J. Thorpe, Karen Bandeen-Roche, Melissa D. Hladek, Boeun Kim, Tiffany Riser
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Addressing structural racism remains a critical challenge in population health and social sciences, as traditional quantitative approaches often fail to disrupt long-standing racialized health hierarchies. This study critically interrogates the process of a multidisciplinary scientific collaboration attempting to operationalize and measure life course structural racism while enacting an anti-racist praxis. DESIGN: Utilizing a collaborative analytic autoethnography framework grounded in social cognitive theory and anti-racist praxis, our team - comprising biostatisticians, nurse scientists, epidemiologists, gerontologists, social scientists, and a nephrologist across racialized groups, career stages, and institutions - treated our team process as a socio-analytical field site. We examined the tension between individualistic paradigms and systemic measurement, gathering qualitative field data from team deliberations, and a dedicated focus group. RESULTS: Three primary autoethnographic themes emerged: operationalizing and understanding structural racism, constructing methodological infrastructure, and navigating accountability and the pursuit of a multidimensional measure. While qualitative life-course history interviews, expert panels, public podcasts, and a national survey advanced conceptual and data infrastructure, significant methodological barriers - including historical address recall, geocoding missingness, and geographic mismatch - prevented immediate measure validation. Autoethnographic reflection revealed how institutional incentives, capitalistic academic pressures, and funding mechanisms complicate collective equity work. CONCLUSION: By interrogating our collaborative process, we demonstrate that doing 'different science' requires prioritizing reflexive, collective team dynamics and infrastructure over rapid measure production. Embedding anti-racist praxis and community accountability into scientific collaborations offers a transformative pathway for advancing structural racism research and dismantling systemic health inequities.

Ethnicity and Health
University of Iowa (US), Johns Hopkins University (US), University of Michigan (US), University of California System (US), Institute for Research and Evaluation (US), Pacific Institute For Research and Evaluation (US), Columbia University (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Race, Genetics, and Society
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.