This commentary is written in response to Sharpe's (2024) article titled "Editor Bias and Transparency in Psychology's Open Science Era." The article clearly describes the conversation on bias, transparency, and editor accountability occurring in the field of psychology in recent years. However, in this era of public accountability, where there is a groundswell seeking a more decolonized science, we use the commentary to discuss how the article could have gone further. We used an equity model to explore whether the model of change being proposed by Sharpe is at the right level of analysis and whether it is equipped with the needed ingredients to bring about a solution to the long-standing problem of editor bias and lack of transparency. We offer an alternative to the individual model that Sharpe's article puts forth and recommend the use of a systems thinking approach to generate action items for a more decolonized science in the realm of publishing and editor bias. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

非殖民化的科学需要更大、更大胆、更少渐进的变革：对夏普的评论 （2024）。


这篇评论是为了回应 Sharpe （2024） 题为“心理学开放科学时代的编辑偏见和透明度”的文章。这篇文章清楚地描述了近年来心理学领域发生的关于偏见、透明度和编辑责任的对话。然而，在这个公共问责的时代，人们掀起了寻求更加去殖民化的科学的浪潮，我们利用评论来讨论这篇文章如何能走得更远。我们使用公平模型来探索 Sharpe 提出的变革模型是否处于正确的分析水平，以及它是否具备解决长期存在的编辑偏见和缺乏透明度问题所需的要素。我们提供了 Sharpe 文章提出的个人模型的替代方案，并建议使用系统思维方法来为出版和编辑偏见领域中更加去殖民化的科学生成行动项目。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 （c） 2024 APA，保留所有权利）。