The incorporation of victim participation into the legal framework of the International Criminal Court (ICC) brought hope, to some, that the voices of victims would be elevated and heard more clearly in the ICC’s proceedings than they had been at previous international criminal tribunals, where they could participate only as witnesses. While research has emphasized the significant distinction to be drawn between the wide pool of victims of international crime and the far more restricted pool of ‘juridified victims’ who participate in international criminal proceedings, less attention has been drawn to the demographics of the juridified victim and the extent to which victim participation is shaped by factors such as age, gender, and disability. This article presents the results of a survey of practitioners and analysis of court documents which indicate that there are a wide range of barriers to the participation of certain groups of victims, which can result in their under-representation. It proposes measures that can be taken to foster a more inclusive victim participation scheme and calls for more rigorous monitoring and reporting on the demographics of victims that participate in ICC proceedings. It also sets out a case for greater inclusion rooted in the rights of victims, the requirements of the Court’s legal framework, the goals of the ICC and the promotion of victim agency and voice.

The right to roam – balancing inclusion and enclosure. In Norway, the right to roam is an old custom – a right to traverse and gather berries, herbs and firewood on uncultivated lands – dating back to the Viking Age. In 1957, this right was included in Norwegian laws, in the Outdoor Life Act (Friluftslova). The law transformed agrarian lands into areas for outdoor life and recreation, primarily walking and hiking. However, due to modernisation, the activities performed today are very different than those in the 1950s, involving many sorts of technical devices and installations, commercial activities and a different landscape. The law was a manifestation of the Norwegian outfields as a commons, but what is a commons for some can be an enclosure for others. This is the topic of this article: how the right to roam includes many and much but represents encroachment, displacements and enclosures and has created crowding, natural wear and tear and urges for management regimes. The article describes this as a balance between inclusion and enclosure. The article has two major parts: one presenting the academic discussion about inclusion and enclosure, the other discussing the implementation of the principle in Norway in light of this theory.

Autistic high school students overwhelmingly have a poor experience of school. Research into this stage of life is limited, and researchers have tended not to talk to autistic students directly, instead hearing from non-autistic observers such as teachers and parents. This study aimed to address this gap in our knowledge by interviewing autistic students in mainstream high schools about their experience of school and their ideas for how this could be improved. Ten autistic students (13 to 20 years old) in Australian high schools were interviewed. Students overwhelmingly reported a negative experience. Most said their ideal school would be one where teachers and peers had greater understanding about autism and teachers had training in autism. By including the student voice, this research makes a valuable contribution to our understanding of autistic students’ school experience, adding depth and detail, and including what they would like to see changed. Importantly, the interview data also challenged misconceptions about what autistic students prioritised. The voice of autistic teens can make an important contribution to policies and practices aimed at improving their experience of school.

It is often claimed that public history represents a democratisation of historical knowledge, but how is “the public” being imagined here? This short article provides a report from a collaborative, student–staff research project that investigated how key stakeholders involved in public history—students, academics, and heritage professionals—understood their publics. It reflects on two key themes that emerged from the testimonies: issues of inclusion and positionality. We analyse a selection of telling cases, situating these extracts in the context of financial pressures, neo-liberal marketisation and the politicisation of DEI agendas. We suggest that there is a need for more open, reflexive, and cross-disciplinary dialogue between different stakeholders about the various publics they construct and engage.

As part of a larger campaign to end diversity, equity, and inclusion, President Donald Trump’s recent Executive Order 14173 eliminated EO 11246 “Equal Employment Opportunity.” In this brief, we provided background on the often-misunderstood EO 11246 and discuss the potential implications of its reversal considering previous state legislation banning affirmative action and the current political context.

Recent executive orders (EOs) issued by the federal government, including EO 14148, EO 14151, EO 14168, and EO 14173, have significantly altered policies related to diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) in research and graduate training within industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology. These orders reverse longstanding federal commitments to DEIA initiatives, modifying research funding criteria, restructuring legal protections, and eliminating diversity-driven hiring mandates. This policy shift introduces substantial challenges for I-O psychology, particularly in securing funding for DEIA-related research, maintaining inclusive graduate training programs, and fostering diverse representation in academia and the workforce. To assess the impact of these policies, I examine the historical context of DEIA policies before these executive actions, outline key modifications introduced by the new EOs, and assess their potential implications for research, graduate education, and workforce development in I-O psychology. These policy changes may constrain academic freedom, reduce opportunities for underrepresented scholars, and disrupt progress in workplace diversity research, ultimately reshaping the field’s capacity to contribute to evidence-based DEIA initiatives.

Through a series of example research studies, we illustrate processes in translating case report forms to increase language diversity in study populations while simultaneously highlighting implications for data collection and analyses. The Northwestern University Data Analysis and Coordinating Center manages the translation of participant-facing study documents into languages other than English through a process that has been refined over several years, adjusting for changes in technical capabilities in electronic case report forms. This approach to manage, examine for context, and implement certified case report form translations offers an efficient workflow to streamline data capture in multiple languages.

The global nutrition community faces an urgent imperative to address inequities in food security while promoting inclusive approaches to nutrition science and practice. The Nutrition Society of Australia’s 2024 Annual Scientific Meeting on ‘Food for All: Promoting Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Nutrition’ addressed this critical challenge through a 4-day programme of cutting-edge, multi-disciplinary research. The conference brought timely focus to key issues, including food access, cultural food practices, nutrition service accessibility, and inclusive research and education approaches. The conference featured public presentations, workshops, oral and poster sessions, symposia, and early career researcher sessions, and emphasised incorporating diverse perspectives while highlighting collaborative approaches to promoting equitable food systems. Coordinated efforts among researchers, healthcare providers, community organisations, industry partners and policymakers remain essential to advance inclusive nutrition practices and ensure equitable access to nutritious food for all populations.

Most scientists are aware that developmental databases derive primarily from Western, middle-class samples, but fewer are cognizant that developmental theories can be similarly biased. There is urgency in revising developmental theories, both scientifically (embracing diversity is essential to the study of human psychology) and applied (it is damaging to apply WEIRD standards/methods/theories to evaluate development in the multitude of non-WEIRD contexts).

We evaluate the extent to which two prominent developmental theories are inclusive. We find that Shared Intentionality Theory is based on a WEIRD bias in the foundational databases: the core constructs lack culturally diverse data, undermining claims that this theory explains human-general social cognition. In Attachment Theory, we illuminate the lack of inclusivity in the core assumptions and resulting claims of the meaning and measure of the attachment system: this theory excludes cultural diversity in social-emotional constructs focused on communal orientations (e.g., interdependence, attachment networks) found in many people of the Global South, and neglects culture-specific adaptive behavior patterns.

Acknowledging the lack of inclusivity at the level of theory is necessary. We urge researchers to take a more WILD approach: obtain Worldwide samples, study development In situ, focus on Local cultural practices and ethnotheories, and consider development as Diverse. Being WILD entails attending to inclusivity during the entire research process, from framing the research questions to interpreting the data (e.g., respecting all adaptive behaviors in development). Five Steps for Increasing Inclusivity can be used as a practical guide to decenter psychological theories from their current WEIRD mindset.

People with disabilities face barriers to employment compared to people without disabilities, including the way in which employment opportunities are structured. The COVID-19 pandemic has opened up new ways of working (e.g. working from home), which have been trialled in a number of different locations, and these have the potential to widen employment opportunities for people with disabilities. It is therefore important to explore the extent to which job preferences differ between people with disabilities and people without disabilities, in particular for aspects such as teleworking. In total, 253 participants (62 male and 191 female) took part in a discrete choice experiment (DCE) that investigates participants’ preferences for various job aspects. These include discretionary medical leave, flexible scheduling, working from home, and the availability of part-time jobs. People with disabilities significantly prefer flexible scheduling and the availability of part-time jobs compared to people without disabilities. The results of a latent class analysis suggest it is older women with disabilities in particular, who most value increased flexible job design. An analysis of lexicographic preferences suggests that it is people who are most constrained by ‘traditional’ working conditions who benefit the most from increased flexibility, e.g. people who require teleworking or flexible scheduling. This suggests that wider adoption of these attributes by employers has the potential to go some way towards addressing the persistent disability employment gaps and related health inequalities observed in many countries around the world.