5 Critical Theory, Critical Theories, and Research

What is Critical Theory?

Critical Theory refers to a specific intellectual tradition that emerged in the early twentieth century in the Frankfurt School, a group of European social scientists and philosophers working within a Marxist, structuralist framework. Grounded in critiques of class struggles and capitalism, Critical theory seeks to expose how economic structures shape social relations and produce inequality, with the explicit goal of informing political action and societal transformation ^[1]. A defining feature of Critical Theory is its rejection of the separation between theory and practice: knowledge production is understood as inherently political, and research is meant to support emancipation from systems of domination.

Critical Theory is interdisciplinary in nature, drawing on philosophy, sociology, economics, and political theory to analyze how power operates through social institutions. However, its primary analytic focus has historically centered economic exploitation and class struggle. While this focus has been generative, it has also been the subject of sustained critique for inadequately accounting for forms of oppression not fully reducible to class, such as racism, colonialism, patriarchy, homophobia, transphobia and other forms of oppression ^[2].

As a result of these critiques, a wide range of critical theories (lowercase, plural) have emerged. These theories are not subtypes or strands of Critical Theory, but rather distinct perspectives that develop in dialogue with—and often in response to—the limitations of classical Marxist analyses. For example, Critical Race Theory arose from dissatisfaction with Marxism’s inability to adequately theorize race and racism; queer theory emerged in part as a response to the ways both Marxism and liberal rights frameworks failed to account for sexuality and gender variance; and decolonial and anticolonial theories challenge Eurocentric assumptions embedded in Western knowledge production itself. While these approaches differ in focus and method, they share a commitment to interrogating power, exposing structural injustice, and linking scholarship to social change.

Critical Perspectives and Research in Psychology and Education

As discussed in earlier sections, one of the main purposes of this textbook is to support students in approaching research methods in psychology and education with critical thinking. This is important because historically, the field of psychology has often used research to perpetuate harm towards marginalized communities. Traditional research paradigms have often claimed objectivity and neutrality while failing to acknowledge that all research is shaped by particular epistemological assumptions, social positions, and power relations (Zuberi & Bonilla-Silva, 2008)^[3].

Research methodologies are influenced by researchers’ positionality, beliefs about how knowledge is constructed, decisions about what questions or topics are of value, and assumptions about what counts as legitimate evidence (Walter & Anderson, 2016)^[4]. When these influences remain unexamined, research can reproduce deficit-based narratives about marginalized communities and reinforce existing systems of oppression.

Applying critical theories to research methods allows scholars to challenge these assumptions and reimagine the research process itself. Rather than treating research as neutral or detached, critical approaches foreground justice, power, and accountability, asking how research can be used to name harm, expose structural inequities, and support transformative change. In this chapter, we introduce several influential critical theories—including Critical Race Theory, intersectionality, and decolonial or anticolonial theory—to explore how they inform research in psychology and education and provide tools for uncovering and challenging injustice. Throughout this chapter, we use the term Critical Theory to refer specifically to the Marxist tradition originating in the Frankfurt School. We use critical theories (lowercase, plural) to refer to a broader set of theoretical frameworks—such as Critical Race Theory, intersectionality, and decolonial or anticolonial theory—that emerged in response to, critique of, or dialogue with Critical Theory’s limitations, particularly its narrow focus on class and political economy.

Critical Race Theory

Critical Race Theory (CRT) articulates both a theory and movement aimed at naming and dismantling the relationships among race, racism, and power (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017)^[5]. It spans diverse fields including law, education, medicine, and social sciences, describing how racism is baked into systems that ultimately maintain power for white bodies and perpetuate harm upon racialized ones (Proctor & Rivera, 2022)^[6]. CRT also emerged as a response to the limitations of Marxist and class-based frameworks, including Critical Theory, which many scholars argued were insufficient for explaining the persistence and centrality of racism. Like many critical theories, CRT includes a political movement or activist component, wherein theory and research are not separated from the ultimate goal of transforming unjust, and in this case, racist systems. It is broader than civil rights or anti-racist movements, which focus on incremental progress, placing race and racism as embedded in the fabric of all institutions and society at large.

CRT emerged in the post-Civil Rights era during a time when color-blind legislation was essentially stalling or rolling back advances that had been made during the civil rights movement. Foundational CRT scholar, Derrick Bell (1992)^[7], argued that racism is a permanent aspect of our society that often goes unacknowledged or remains invisible. This makes racism insidious and, therefore, extremely challenging to address. Critical race theory built on two important movements, radical feminism and critical legal studies. Radical feminism exposes the connection between social roles and gendered power relations, as well as the everyday practices, routines, and habits that create patriarchy (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). CRT also built upon radical activist movements, including the Black Power and Chicano movements, and critical figures like W.E.B. DuBois and Fredrick Douglass.

Core Tenets of CRT

Although CRT shares with other critical theories a commitment to structural analysis and social transformation, its core tenets are distinct and specifically focused on race and racism. The first of these is that racism is an ordinary or a normal and permanent feature of United States (U.S.) society (Bell, 1992). As a result, racism is embedded in the systems and structures of everyday life, making it difficult to see and therefore challenging to undo. CRT scholars also agree that white supremacy benefits the dominant group in ways that mean white elites will likely not want to eradicate racism because of the material and psychological privileges it affords them. Said another way, white people will not be interested in supporting anti-racist efforts unless they also benefit from it, a tenet also known as interest convergence (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017).

A third core tenet of CRT is the idea that race is socially constructed, as opposed to fixed or biologically determined. As a result, racial categories are created, manipulated, and utilized when convenient for those in power. In this way, it is actually racism that creates and perpetuates race, based on changing perceptions of skin color or other physical features of racialized people (Proctor & Rivera, 2022). CRT scholars also note the ways in which different minoritized groups are racialized differently at different times, usually in response to the needs of the economy or labor market, an idea known as differential racialization (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). Related to this idea is the concept of intersectionality and antiessentialism. We will discuss intersectionality more in detail in the next section, but this tenet conveys that every individual has a complex, multilayered identity and cannot be reduced or essentialized into just one category. Finally, CRT’s last tenet specifically highlights the importance of lifting up the lived experiences and stories of marginalized people as a means to curing silence and naming types of discrimination so that they can be fought against (Delgado & Stefancic, 2017). This process is known as counter-storytelling, a powerful CRT tool used to highlight the humanity of marginalized peoples by calling attention to the contradictions, misconceptions, and harm that racism imposes on people of color.

CRT’s Impact on Research in Education and Psychology 

CRT has had a significant impact on the fields of psychology and education. In psychology, for example, CRT has supported researchers in understanding the psychological impact of racism on the well-being of people of color, including areas like identity development, trauma, and overall mental health (e.g., Helms, 1990). In education, CRT scholars have used this lens to provide structural and systemic explanations for disparities in achievement or discipline practices between white students and students of color. For example, Gloria Ladson-Billings, a prominent educational researcher, famously described what she coined to be the “education debt,” explaining that the achievement gap between Black and white students was actually the result of structural inequities and systemic neglect across generations (Ladson-Billings, 2006). In the next chapter, we discuss QuantCrit, a critical methodological framework grounded in CRT that originated from the education field (Crawford et al., 2018). Applying QuantCrit to our understanding of statistics allows us to critically examine taken-for-granted assumptions in research and utilize quantitative methods for social justice purposes. Below is a video outline What Critical Race Theory Actually Is — and Isn’t narrated by historian and author Ibram X. Kendi.

Video 5.1 What Critical Race Theory Actually Is – and Isn’t by NowThis Impact

Intersectionality 

Intersectionality is a critical theory grounded in Black feminist thought with a focus on the unique experience of women of color who find themselves at the intersection of race, class, and gender oppression (Hancock, 2016)^[8]. It developed in dialogue with critical race theory and decolonial thought by highlighting the simultaneous effects of belonging to multiple social categories that are constructed by connected systems of oppression and power. Put succinctly, an intersectional lens allows us to understand how the various identities one carries, such as race, gender, class, and sexuality, all interact to create a unique, multidimensional experience of privilege and marginalization.

Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989)^[9], a critical legal scholar, coined the term intersectionality. She critiqued how antidiscrimination law frequently left out the experiences of Black women whose identities place them at the intersection of both racial and gender discrimination. She argued that Black women did not just experience gender oppression as white women did or racial oppression as Black men did, but rather experienced the unique and cumulative effects of both identities. She asserted that “the intersectional experience is greater than the sum of racism and sexism, any analysis that does not take intersectionality into account cannot sufficiently address the particular manner in which Black women are subordinated” (p. 140). In this way, Crenshaw paved the way for the application of intersectional thought by moving beyond single-axis analysis to reveal interlocking systems of oppression.

Core Tenets of Intersectionality

Patricia Hill Collins is another foundational intersectionality scholar who elaborated on the interconnected nature of power systems. She outlines the core constructs of intersectionality as (1) relationality; (2) power; (3) social inequality; (4) social context; (5) complexity; and (6) social justice (Hill Collins, 2019)^[10]. Relationality refers to the idea that systems of power, like class, race, and gender, are actually connected and mutually constructed. This means that they maintain one another, creating an interlocking web that upholds these hierarchies. Intersectionality theory posits that systems of power co-create one another and work together to produce social inequalities. Social inequality is the systematic and enduring unequal distribution of resources, opportunities, and power across social groups, shaped by social structures and institutions. Social context is important in terms of how knowledge is produced among different communities and how this relates to systems of power and what types of knowledge are valued. Intersectional work is also, by nature, complex because it accounts for multiple, interacting social categories that create unique individual experiences in response to interlocking systems of oppression. Finally, social justice is a core construct in intersectionality theory and research because it demands that theory and practice be connected. Like all critical theories, intersectionality inherently includes an activism component wherein we are obligated to use this critical theory to not only reveal inequities but also change them.

Intersectionality’s Impact on Research in Education and Psychology

Intersectionality has had important impacts on psychology and education research and practice. It has helped us understand how intersecting oppressions affect mental health. For example, a Black queer woman will experience unique stressors and challenges as she encounters racist, sexist, and homophobic systems in society. In education research, intersectional frameworks have helped reveal how systemic barriers intersect to perpetuate academic and discipline disparities for students from marginalized backgrounds. Research indicates that Black girls tend to be disproportionately suspended from school compared to their white female counterparts (Crenshaw, 2016)^[11]. The unique experience of Black girls in school is a result of their intersecting race and gender identities, which must both be understood in order to end punitive disciplinary practices that push these young women out of school. The video below features Dr. Bettina Love, a prominent Education Researcher, discussing why she thinks it is so critical to focus on the needs of Black girls in school.

Video 5.2 Bettina Love: On Black Girls, Discipline, and Schools by Education Week

Decolonial and Anticolonial Frameworks

Decolonial and Anticolonial frameworks are two additional important critical theories that have had a wide-reaching impact across many disciplines. These two schools of thought critically investigate and seek to dismantle the effects of colonialism on knowledge, land, language, identity, culture, and power (Quijano, 2000)^[12]. Colonialism, in its most basic sense, is when a country or region is dominated politically, socially, culturally, and economically by another country. Decolonial and anticolonial scholar activists argue that colonialism has lasting effects well beyond formal decolonization. While decolonial scholars focus especially on the residue of colonialism that remain in the ways of knowing and being of colonized peoples, anticolonial scholars also stress the importance of resistance to and freedom from colonialism via the survival and sovereignty of Indigenous peoples, demanding tangible political changes such as land rematriation and the reclamation of cultural languages and governing systems (Tuck & Yang, 2012)^[13]. Taken together, both these frameworks seek to dismantle colonial systems and structures from the mind, body, spirit, land, and power systems. Furthermore, decolonial and anticolonial theories explicitly critique Western epistemologies, including Marxist Critical Theory, for reproducing Eurocentric assumptions about knowledge, progress, and liberation.

Core Tenets of Decolonial and Anticolonial Frameworks 

Both Decolonial and Anticolonial theorists emphasize that colonialism is not a thing of the past but rather a persisting power present in current systems and structures (Quijano, 2000). This central tenet is critical because it highlights the ongoing effects of colonialism not just in terms of political control but also in its difficult-to-see forms, such as what types of ways of knowing are valued. This leads to a second core tenet of decolonial thought, a concept called epistemic decolonization, which emphasizes centering indigenous ways of thinking and producing knowledge, which are typically devalued in comparison to Eurocentric knowledge (Mignolo, 2011). Decolonial scholar Walter Mignolo advocated for what he termed epistemic disobedience, or actively resisting colonial ways of thinking and lifting up indigenous epistemology, such as oral traditions and land-based knowledge. Building on this, another core tenet in an Anticolonial framework is the reclamation of Indigenous sovereignty. Anticolonial scholars assert that decolonization demands action. This includes things like returning land to indigenous peoples, supporting the preservation and resurgence of indigenous language and culture. Relatedly, anticolonial thought fights against the cultural assimilation that colonization forces on colonized peoples. Anticolonial scholar Linda Tuhiwai Smith (2012) discusses decolonizing methodologies and tools like storytelling and art as a means toward recovering indigenous ways of knowing and being.

Decolonial and Anticolonial Frameworks’ Impact on Research in Education and Psychology

Decolonial and Anticolonial thought have influenced research, practice, and political movements. These scholars have exposed Eurocentric hierarchies in ways of thinking and behaving that have resulted in trauma and internalized oppression caused by colonialism (Fanon, 1961). Decolonial frameworks also help us to understand and heal these wounds from the inside out. It has also highlighted the effects of colonization on Indigenous peoples of the U.S. For example, the U.S. government funded Indian boarding schools in the late 1800s that forced assimilation on indigenous communities. Children were removed from their families and subjected to all kinds of abuse and cultural erasure (National Native American Boarding School Healing Coalition, 2021). Decolonial thought makes colonial violence clear and advocates for land rematriation, the affirmation of indigenous traditions, and psychological healing from trauma. In psychology, Decolonial thought also supports community-based research in which research is conducted with communities, not for them, ensuring voice and engagement. In the video below, psychologist and researcher Dr. Thema Bryant Davis discusses why we need to decolonize psychology.

Video 5.3 Why we need to decolonize psychology | Thema Bryant | TEDxNashville by TEDx Talks