‘What do we need to change to be accessible?’

Why are you surveying barriers to engagement, and why now?

Over the years I've been involved with QMiP, we've always had an interest in ensuring that it's reflective and representative of qualitative psychologists, whatever they're doing and wherever they may be. As qualitative researchers, historically, you're sometimes fighting for a seat at the table within the discipline; so it feels even more that we need to make sure people aren't fighting for a seat at the table within QMiP.

When Sarah Seymour-Smith and I took over as Chairs last year, we talked about wanting to have a set of priorities. One of those was inclusion and trying to make sure that QMiP was accessible to qualitative psychologists, particularly from underrepresented or marginalised groups. I saw that the BPS were advertising a pot of funds for different member networks to do a piece of research, that the Research Team within the BPS would then support. We put together a proposal, saying that the research methods that qualitative psychologists use are often being used to examine subjective human experience in complex and contested areas of identity, including related to protected characteristics. So it feels important that QMiP is recognising some of the challenges for people whose backgrounds link into different identity groups, including marginalised racial backgrounds. Is QMiP an accessible place of belonging for those folk?

It also linked to work that I did when I was involved in the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Taskforce for the BPS, recognising some of the particular challenges that Black Psychologists and psychologists from other racially marginalised backgrounds face in terms of inclusion within the BPS. I don't think we really got to the point of properly understanding what those barriers were. It felt like this pot of funding might be an opportunity for us as QMiP to do something quite contained, that might help us understand that better, and be able to then try and respond to it. 

The Research Team were really interested in doing it, but they thought it was something that all of the BPS should be doing, which I don't think anybody disputes. So then we had conversations with the newly formed EDI board who were really supportive, and we thought we would use this as a pilot study.

How specific is the survey to qualitative areas? Will it easily lend itself to being rolled out to other networks? 

Primarily, what we're interested in understanding are the issues experienced by racially minoritised, qualitative psychologists in relation to their professional lives, and barriers around engagement, both with QMiP and the BPS more widely. What are the things that might increase engagement or accessibility, and is there a role for QMiP as a member network in addressing some of those challenges? 

So the questions would relate, regardless of which type of psychologist you are. But the focus for us in keeping it contained, is to explore that with qualitative psychologists, whether they're in the BPS, or whether they're not, whether they're in QMiP, or whether they're not. If you can access the survey, then you can respond to it. Hopefully, we'll get some information that helps us as QMiP, but that information is also meaningful to the wider EDI work of the BPS.  

And you'd have no reason to think that these inclusion issues are exacerbated in your areas?

I hope not. I guess that's something we might find out, which is why we've tried to keep the questions as open and inductive as possible. But it's more about us holding a particular responsibility. As QMiP members we are often working in contested areas and trying to understand complexity and nuance, and respond to challenges to things like inclusion. You've got to be willing to look close to home. What are we actually doing as a collective, to think about our own members and people who currently aren't members, and how we're making QMiP a space they want to join? 

One of the big barriers is presumably time to be involved… that's the case for any membership body relying on voluntary input, and it disproportionately impacts minority groups.

It is really hard. Sarah, and I, as co-chairs, have really valued that collaborative process of leading QMiP, and we're inviting those who follow as chair to think about that process of co-chairing as well. I do absolutely agree about time. But I also think that once you're involved, it can seem like the easiest thing in the world… people are really nice, it feels like a community. But it's taking that leap to get involved. I personally found it really scary. I've always been a member, I joined when the Section was first set up, 20 years next year. I never had any involvement, in any active way until six years ago. I just didn't have the confidence when I saw those roles come up… so if I can feel like that… 

You say 'if I can feel like that', but we're back to your imposterism, aren't we?

For me, when we feel like imposters, very often that's a reflection of a system and a structure that's set up in a certain way. We are imposters, versus imposterism being a flawed way of individual thinking. We've got to change the systems. That's part of this survey – what do we need to change to be accessible, rather than how will the people need to change the way they think in order to fit in. 

There's one particular Division of the BPS where the committee level has quite often seemed like the real superstars of the field. You can imagine that's quite intimidating for people looking to get involved. But actually, they're all amazing, incredibly supportive people who are really keen to mentor the next generation. So it's about breaking down the barriers at that first step and showing people 'Look, we're not that scary, honestly, and there's a lot to be gained from getting involved'.

Completely. If you were to go on a website, and see names of the committee members, and you recognise them from papers you're reading and citing… that is intimidating, perhaps particularly if you're not fortunate enough to work in a department where those people are, so they are only ever names in a journal… it's easy to imagine that it's an exclusionary space.

Being involved has got to have value as well. For some people, they are looking to do more external activity, because it's about career development. And for a lot of people, it's also about something intrinsic – a value to being part of a community, to feel a sense of belonging, a sense of purpose. All those bits of belonging can quickly disappear out of a really busy day, particularly when so many of us are working at home a lot. So if you're going to spend an hour at a committee meeting, or you're going to go to a conference, what is the driver? Why would you want to be there? It's got to be something about that being a community that makes you feel welcome and valued. Small things, tweaks that we might be able to make, different ways of shaping and communicating might elevate that. 

Each different protected characteristic has got particular potentials, barriers and challenges. Our focus on racially minoritised backgrounds is an important start point, to provide us with information that we can action. 

There must be quite a lot of pressure, putting together a survey as a qualitative researcher!

If I've got nervousness around it, it's the fact that the conversations I've had with psychologists from marginalised or minoritised racial backgrounds show they get asked a lot of times, a lot of questions, and don't see a lot of change. But you can't let that stop you from trying. The survey is very broad, open questions, but we've put a lot of time into ending up with a small number of questions that will give us meaningful information. If we get enough people filling it in, I hope we will arrive with some knowledge that can lead to actual change.

• Are you a qualitative psychologist from a racially minoritised background? If so, please consider completing the brief survey to help continue to develop an inclusive qual community.