In recognizing disparities and racism in scientific publishing, publishing manuals and journals are increasingly advancing initiatives to address the use of bias-free language. Inclusive language, including terminology and word choice, is critical in supporting diversity and conveying respect to individuals, groups, and populations. Conscious and proper use of bias-free terms recognizes the inclusive dimensions of identities and serves to decrease marginalization and/or stereotyping. Even a seasoned author may have difficulty initially due to long-standing beliefs and writing style. As authors, we must remember that terms, language, and experiences change over time, so we must be current and deliberate in our choice of words. Use of advocacy groups as resources can help an author best describe the individual or group(s) referred to in the writing.

Within the American Psychological Association (APA) Publication Manual seventh edition (2020), a chapter dedicated to bias-free language guidelines is included. "It is unacceptable to use constructions that might imply prejudicial beliefs or perpetuate biased assumptions against persons on the basis of age, disability, gender, participation in research, racial or ethnic identity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status or some combination of these or other personal factors" (APA, 2020, p. 131). Authors should purposefully strive to use language that is clear, affirming, and free of prejudicial connotations.

The APA seventh edition manual, as well as some other writing style manuals, provides general guidelines for reducing bias. Word choice should always be accurate, clear, and free of bias. Language that is incorrect, ambiguous, or perceived as derogatory can be interpreted as a form of bias. For example, when writing about age, be specific. Exact ages or age ranges are more specific rather than broad categories such as seniors, the aged, or elderly (APA, 2020, p. 133). Generational terms such as baby boomers or millennials should only be used if the topic area or research is directly related to a generational group. Broad terms for socioeconomic status such as homeless, inner city, and welfare-recipient hold negative connotations that can imply stigmatizing, so are best avoided (APA, 2020, p. 148).

Authors should be mindful to refer to only relevant characteristics. Describing every characteristic of an individual or group of persons is not always necessary or even appropriate. If you need to be specific in characteristics when writing a scholarly paper, then address the ways in which these characteristics intersect and why they are important within the context. It is important that writers need to acknowledge that differences do exist. These differences should be mentioned only when relevant to the context or study results. When talking about differences, the word "difference" itself must be used carefully to not imply negativity toward an individual or group(s).

When deciding which characteristics to refer to, be sure that they are appropriately specific. This specificity will depend on the research question being answered and what the knowledge area is. Researchers should consider the appropriate level of specificity early in the process. Specific terms help the reader understand the generalizability of findings as well as the researcher's ability to use data for meta-analysis (APA, 2020, p.132). However, race, ethnicity, and gender are dynamic social constructs. Some people may identify with more than one race and/or ethnicity such that demographic information might not be absolute (Flanagin, Frey, & Christensen, 2021). If defined, terms such as multiethnic, multiracial, or mixed race may be appropriate. The sex and gender equity in research (SAGER) guidelines provide a comprehensive procedure for reporting sex and gender information because these terms are sometimes used incorrectly or without adequate detail in description or reporting. The SAGER guidelines can be used by authors in preparing manuscripts for publication (Heidari et al., 2016).

Writers need to be sensitive to labels. What do people call themselves? Language changes over time as does descriptions or definitions of individuals and groups. For example, terms used in the past such as brain damaged or substance abuser are now more appropriately termed using descriptors like person(s) with traumatic brain injury or person(s) with substance use disorder (APA, 2020, p.137). We must be cognizant that disagreement may exist between individuals or groups as to the term that is currently being used. One must be careful when speaking with individuals because they themselves might be using slurs that can be demeaning to others or cause stigmatization. For example, such slurs might include labeling terms related to ethnicity/race, disabilities, sexual orientation, age, or mental health conditions. If you are writing about a specific group, choose labels/categories with sensitivity to convey respect. Avoid using derogatory adjectives; instead use adjectival forms or nouns as descriptive phrases (APA, 2020, p.133). For example, "patients with diabetes" is an appropriate term rather than diabetics or diabetes patients. The later terms impose labels that reduce the individual's identity to that of a disease.

When providing comparisons of groups, an author needs to avoid creating false hierarchies. For example, use of the term "normal" for one group implies that those in other groups are "abnormal". Likewise, comparisons with a general public implies that other groups may be marginalized. When presenting data, a strategy such as alphabetizing groups can help in avoidance of an unintentional creation of a social dominance hierarchy (APA, 2020, p. 134).

The childhood "sticks and stones" rhyme may have been used in the past to help in coping with abusive words used in bullying but that adage is outdated in today's society. Words can be hurtful and disrespectful, so as writers we must not contribute to conscious or unconscious bias in our writing. Resources are available and should be readily used to assist us in including nonstigmatizing, culturally sensitive, and inclusive language within our publications.

References