Open science advocates promote universal high standards for scientific research and make scientific quality (as they define it) the sole criterion for judging research. Rather than seeking research that finds a particular result, or that is done by a particular kind of scientist, open science remains deliberately neutral on these issues. In contrast, socially responsive science advocates argue that the current status quo in psychological science involves significant bias against (a) scholars from historically underrepresented groups and (b) work that addresses social problems, leading to a need for proactive, compensatory actions. Whether these compensatory actions go too far (or are justified to begin with) is not always clear, and a psychologist’s viewpoint on this question is likely based in their own personal experiences and general social and political views, setting up another source of conflict.