This article spotlights a widespread problem in research and practice: Asians are commonly categorized as a monolithic group in the United States. Regarding research, my 24-year archival analysis of Psychological Science shows that most U.S. studies did not specify which Asian subgroup(s) were examined. Regarding practice, my analysis of the diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) webpages and latest diversity reports of S&P 100 companies finds that none of them differentiated between Asian subgroups. Such use of the generic category “Asian” is problematic because it masks important differences among Asian subgroups: (a) Of all ethnic groups in the United States, socioeconomic inequality among Asian subgroups is the highest and fastest growing; (b) U.S. studies show that East Asians (e.g., ethnic Chinese)—but not South Asians (e.g., ethnic Indians)—experience a “bamboo ceiling” in consequential contexts, including leadership attainment, academic performance in law and business schools, and starting salaries. Thus, lumping Asians together can obscure the challenges faced by certain Asian subgroups and jeopardize the attention and resources they need. More broadly, this article demonstrates the importance of differentiating between ethnic subgroups in research (e.g., theorization, surveys, and data analysis) and practice (e.g., diversity reports) to foster DEI.

中文翻译：

---

“亚洲”在研究和实践中是一个有问题的类别：来自竹子天花板的见解


本文强调了研究和实践中一个普遍存在的问题：在美国，亚洲人通常被归类为一个铁板一块的群体。在研究方面，我对心理科学 24 年的档案分析表明，大多数美国研究并没有具体说明研究了哪些亚洲亚群体。在实践方面，我对标准普尔 100 指数公司的多元化、公平和包容性 （DEI） 网页和最新的多元化报告的分析发现，它们都没有区分亚洲子群体。这种使用通用类别“亚洲人”是有问题的，因为它掩盖了亚洲亚裔群体之间的重要差异：（a） 在美国的所有种族群体中，亚裔亚裔亚群体之间的社会经济不平等是最高和增长最快的;（b） 美国研究表明，东亚人（例如华人）——而不是南亚人（例如印度人）——在相应的背景下经历了“竹子天花板”，包括领导成就、法学院和商学院的学习成绩以及起薪。因此，将亚洲人混为一谈可能会掩盖某些亚洲亚裔群体面临的挑战，并危及他们所需的关注和资源。更广泛地说，本文展示了在研究（例如理论化、调查和数据分析）和实践（例如多样性报告）中区分种族亚群体以促进 DEI 的重要性。