Do STS Studies Have Gender?
Women And Gender In Academic Research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52712/issn.1850-0013-484Keywords:
inequalities, women, gender, STS, academic journalsAbstract
Publication processes have a key relevance in research, and academic journals are a privileged medium to provide updated information on the development of knowledge in the different scientific spheres. This paper discusses the inequalities between men and women in publications on STS journals. The purpose of this piece is twofold: on the one hand, to provide statistical information about the situation of women and gender; on the other, to analyze the methodological and thematic transformation of this field with the introduction of gender studies. To carry this out, we have analyzed the content of papers on gender of three different academic journals: Social Studies of Science (1971), Science, technology and Human Values (1972) and Technology and Culture (1959). The results reveal the importance of women’s participation in these journals, not only to increase the number of women’s publications, but also to have access to a greater number of articles about women and gender in STS. Although feminist gender studies and STS studies share the interdisciplinary aspect and the methodological pluralism, we observe a reluctance of STS studies to fully contribute to the feminist theory. The science, technology and gender studies are a common platform between these two traditions whose convergence is a key challenge of the feminist analysis.
Downloads
References
ADAMS, Elizabeth y BURNETT, G. W. (1991): “Scientific Vocabulary Divergence among Female Primatologists Working in East Africa”, SSS, vol. 21, n° 3, pp. 547-560.
BENHAMOU, Reed (1984): “Verdigris and the Entreprenues”, T&C, vol. 25, n° 2, pp. 171-181.
BERG, Anne-Jorung y LIE, Merete (1995): “Feminism and Constructivism: Do Artifacts Have Gender?”, ST&HV, vol. 20, n° 3, pp. 332-351.
BLÁZQUEZ GRAF, Norma y FLORES, Javier (2005): Ciencia, Tecnología y Género en Iberoamérica, México, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
BOSE, Christine et al (1984): “Household Technology and the Social Construction of Housework”, T&C, vol. 25, n° 1, pp. 53-82.
BRUER, John (1984): “Women in Science: Toward Equitable Participation”, ST&HV, vol. 9, n° 3, pp. 3-7.
BULLOGH, Vern (1981): “A Brief Note on Rubber Technology and Contraception: The Diaphragm and the Condom”, T&C, vol. 22, n° 1, pp. 104-111.
BURRAGE, Hillary (1983): “Women University Teachers of Natural Science, 1971-72: An Empirical Survey”, SSS, vol. 13, n° 1, pp.147-160.
CHEVEIGNE, Suzanne de (2009): “The Career Paths of Women (and Men) in French Research”, SSS, vol. 39, n° 1, pp. 113-136.
COWAN, Ruth (1976): “The ‘Industrial revolution’ in the House: Household Technology and Social Change in the Twentieth Century”, T&C, vol. 17, n° 1, pp. 1-23.
DAY, Tanis (1992): “Capital-Labor Substitution in the Home”, T&C, vol. 33, n° 2, pp. 302-327.
DELAMONT, Sara (1987): “Three Blind Spots? A Comment on the Sociology of Science by a Puzzled Outsider”, SSS, vol. 17, n° 1, pp. 163-170.
FAULKNER, Wendy (2000a): “The Power and the Pleasure? A Research Agenda for “Making Gender Stick” to Engineers”, ST&HV, vol. 25, n° 1, pp. 87-119.
FAULKNER, Wendy (2000b): “Dualisms, Hierarchies and Gender in Engineering”, SSS, vol. 30, n° 5, pp. 759-792.
FAULKNER, Wendy (2001): “’Nuts and Bolts and People’’: Gender-Troubled Engineering Identities”, SSS, vol. 24, n° 1, pp. 79-95.
FAUSTO-STERLING, Anne (2008): “’The Bare Bones of race”, SSS, vol. 38, n° 5, pp. 657-694.
FEENBERG, Andrew (1999): “Review Essay: On bridging the gap between science & technology studies: Sandra Harding’s Is Science Multicultural?”, ST&HV, pp. 483-494.
FISHMAN, Jennifer (2004): “Manufacturing Desire: The Commodification of Female Sexual Dysfunction”, SSS, Intersections of Pharmaceutical Research and Marketing, vol. 34, n° 2, pp. 187-218.
FOLLETTE, Marcel (1988): “Eyes on the Stars: Images of Women Scientists in Popular Magazines”, ST&HV, vol. 13, n° 3-4, pp. 262-275.
FONOW, Mary Margaret y COOK, Judith (2005): “Feminist Methodology: New Applications in the Academy and Public Policy”, Signs, vol. 30, n° 4, p. 2213.
FONOW, Mary Margaret y COOK, Judith (1991): Beyond Methodology: Feminist Scholarship as Lived Research, Indiana University Press.
FOX-KELLER, Evelyn (1983): A Feeling For The Organism, San Francisco, W.H. Freeman. Traducción al español (1984): Seducida por lo vivo: vida y obra de Barbara McClintock, Barcelona, Fontalba.
FOX-KELLER, Evelyn (1985/1991): Reflexiones sobre Género y Ciencia, Valencia, Edicions Alfons el Magnànim.
FOX-KELLER, Evelyn (1988): “Feminist Perspectives on Science Studies”, ST&HV, vol. 13, n° 3-4, pp. 235-249.
FOX-KELLER, Evelyn (1989). «Just What is so Difficult About the Concept of Gender as a Social Category», SSS, vol. 19, n° 4, pp. 721-724.
GAMBER, Wendy (1995): “’Reduced to science’: Gender, Technology, and power in the American dressmaking trade, 1860-1910”, T&C, vol. 36, n° 3, pp. 455-482.
GILLIGAN, Carol (1985): La moral y la teoría. Psicología del desarrollo femenino, México, Fondo de Cultura Económica.
GREEN, Venus (1995): “Race and Technology: African American Women in the Bell System, 1945-1980”, T&C, vol. 36, n° 2, pp. 101-143.
GRINT, Keith y GILL, Rosalind (1995): The Gender-Technology Relation: Contemporary Theory And Research, Londres, Taylor and Francis.
GUPTA, Namrata (2007) : “Indian women in doctoral education in Science and Engineering: A study of informal milieu at the reputed Indian Institutes of Technology”, ST&HV, vol. 32, n° 5, pp. 507-533.
GUPTA, Namrata y SHARMA, Arun (2002): “Women academic scientists in India”, SSS, vol. 32, n° 6, pp. 901-915.
HACKER, Barton y HACKER, Sally (1987): “Military Institutions & the Labor Process: Noneconomic Sources of Technological Change, Women’s Subordination, & the Organization of Work”, T&C, vol. 28, n° 4, pp. 743-775.
HARDING, S. (1998): Is Science Multicultural?: Postcolonialisms, Feminisms, and Epistemologies, Bloomington, Indiana University Press.
HELMREICH, S. (1998): “Recombination, Rationality, Reductionism and Romantic Reactions: Culture, Computers, and the Genetic Algorithm”, SSS, vol. 28, n° 1, pp. 39- 71.
HIDDINGA, A y S. S. BLUME (1992): “Technology, Science, and Obstetric Practice: The Origins and Transformation of Cephalopelvimetry”, ST&HV, vol. 17, n° 2, pp. 154- 179.
HIRSCHAUER, Stefan y MOL, Annemarie (1995): “Shifting Sexes, Moving Stories: Feminist/Constructivist Dialogues”, ST&HV, vol. 20, n° 3, pp. 368-385.
HORNIG, Susanna (1992): “Gender Differences in Responses to News about Science and Technology”, ST&HV, vol. 17, n° 4, pp. 532-542.
HUNTER, Laura y LEAHEY, Erin (2010): “Parenting and Research Productivity: New Evidence and Methods”, SSS, vol. 40, n° 3, pp. 433-451.
KARNIK, Niranjan (2001): “Locating HIV/AIDS and India: Cautionary Notes on the Globalization of Categories”, ST&HV, vol. 26, n° 3, pp. 332-248.
KERR, Anne (2000): “(Re) Constructing Genetic Disease: The Clinical Continuum between Cystic Fibrosis and Male Infertility”, SSS, vol. 30, n° 6, pp. 847-894.
KIREJCZYK, Marta (1999): “Parliamentary Cultures and Human Embryos: The Dutch and British Debates Compared”, SSS, vol. 29, n° 6, pp. 889-912.
KRAFT, Joan y SIEGENTHALER, Jurg (1989): “Office Automation, Gender, and Change: An Analysis of the Management Literature”, ST&HV, vol. 14, n° 2, pp. 195- 212.
KYVIK, Svein (1990): “Motherhood and Scientific Productivity”, SSS, vol. 20, n° 1, pp. 149-160.
KYVIK, Svein y TEIGEN, Mari (1996): “Child Care, research Cololaboration, and Gender Differences in Scientific Productivity”, ST&HV, vol. 21, n° 1, pp. 54-71.
LAGESEN, Vivian Anette (2007): “The Strength of Numbers: Strategies to include Women into Computers Science”, SSS, vol. 37, n° 1, pp. 67-92.
LERMAN, Nina (1997): “Preparing for the duties and practical business of life: Technological knowledge and social structure in mid-19th-century Philadelphia”, T&C, Gender Analysis and the History of Technology, vol. 38, n° 1, pp. 31-59.
LERMAN, Nina, PALMER MOHUN, Arwen y OLDENZIEL, Ruth (1997): “The shoulders we stand on and the view from here: Historiography and directions for research”, T&C, vol. 36, n° 3, pp. 9-30.
LIGHT, Jennifer (1999): “When Computers were Women”, T&C, vol. 40, n° 3, pp. 455-83.
LIGHTMAN, Alan y MILLAR, Jon (1989): “Contemporary Cosmological Beliefs”, SSS, vol. 19, n° 1, pp. 127-136.
LOHAN,, Maria (2000): “Constructive Tensions in Feminist Technology Studies», SSS, vol. 30, n° 6, pp. 895-916.
MÄHLCK, Paula (2001): “Mapping Gender Differences in Scientific Careers in Social and Bibliometric Space”, ST&HV, vol. 26, n° 2, pp. 167-190.
MAZUR, Alan, ROTHMAN, Stanley y LICHTER, Robert (2001): “Biases about Man- Made cancer among Researchers”, SSS, vol. 31, n° 5, pp. 771-787.
MAZUR, Alan y CONANT, Beverli (1978): “Controversy Over A Local Nuclear Waste Repository”, SSS, vol. 8, n° 2, pp. 235-243.
MCCREA, Frances y MARKLE, Gerald (1984): “The Estrogen Replacement Controversy in the USA and UK: Different Answers to the Same Question?”, SSS, vol. 14, n° 1, pp. 1-26.
MCGAW, Judith (1997): “Inventors and Other Great Women: Toward a Feminist History of Technological Luminaries”, T&C, Gender Analysis and the History of Technology, vol. 38, n° 1, pp. 214-231.
MELLSTRÖM, Ulf (2002): “Patriarchal Machines and Masculine Embodiment”, SSS, vol. 27, n° 4, pp. 460-78.
MITROFF, Ian, JACOB, Theodore y TRAUTH MOORE, Eileen (1977): “On the Shoulders of the Spouses of Scientists”, SSS, vol. 7, n° 3, pp. 303-27.
MULKAY, Michael (1994): “Women in the Parliamentary Debate over Embryo Research”, ST&HV, vol. 19, n° 1, pp. 5-22.
NICKLES, Shelley (2002): “Preserving Women: Refrigerator Design as Social Process in the 1930s”, T&C, Kitchen Technologies, vol. 43, n° 4, pp. 693-727.
OLDENZIEL, Ruth (1997): “Boys and Their Toys: The Fisher Body Craftsman’s Guild, 1930-1968, and the Making of a Male Technical Domain”, T&C, vol. 38, n° 1, pp. 60-96.
OUDSHOORN, Nelly (1990): “On the making of sex hormones: research materials and the production of knowledge”, SSS, vol. 20, n° 1, pp. 5-33.
PALMER MOHUN, Arwen (1997): “Laundrymen Construct Their World: Gender and the Transformation of a Domestic Task to an Industrial Process”, T&C, vol. 38, n° 1, pp. 97-120.
PÉREZ SEDEÑO, Eulalia (2001): Las mujeres en el sistema de Ciencia y Tecnología. Estudio de casos. Cuadernos de Iberoamérica, Madrid, OEI.
PÉREZ SEDEÑO, Eulalia y GÓMEZ RODRÍGUEZ, Amparo (2008): “Igualdad y Equidad en Ciencia y Tecnología: el caso Iberoamericano”, Arbor, vol. 184, n° 733.
PÉREZ SEDEÑO, Eulalia, ALCALÁ, Paloma, GONZÁLEZ, Marta I., VILLOTA, Paloma de, ROLDÁN, Concha y SANTESMASES, María de Jesús (2006): Ciencia, Tecnología y Género en Iberoamérica, Monografías, n° 29, Madrid, CSIC.
PÉREZ SEDEÑO, Eulalia y ALCALÁ, Paloma (2001): Ciencia y género, Facultad de Filosofía, Universidad Complutense de Madrid.
PRINS, Baukje (1995): “The Ethics of Hybrid Subjects: Feminist Constructivism According to Donna Haraway”, ST&HV, vol. 20, n° 3, pp. 352-367.
PURSEL, Carrol (1993): “ Am I a lady or an engineer?” The origins of the Women’s Engineering Society in Britain, 1918-1940”, T&C, vol. 34, n° 1, pp. 78-97.
RAVETZ, Alison (1965): “Modern technology and an ancient occupation: housework in present-day society”, T&C, vol. 6, n° 2, pp. 256-260.
RICHARDS, Evellen y SCHUESTER, John (1989): “The Feminine Method as Myth and Accounting Resource: A Challenge to Gender Studies and Social Studies of Science”, SSS, vol. 19, n° 4, pp. 697-720
RIP, Arie (1988): “Keller on Science Studies, or Reflexivity Revisited”, ST&HV, vol. 13, n° 3-4, pp. 254-261.
ROSE, Hilary (1983): “Hand, Brain and Heart: A feminist Epistemology for the Natural Sciences”, Signs, vol. 9, n° 1, pp. 73-90.
ROSSITER, Margaret (1982): Women Scientists in America: Struggles and Strategies to 1940, Baltimore, John Hopkins University.
ROSSITER, Margaret (1993): “The Matthew Matilda Effect en Science», Social Studies of Science, vol. 23, n° 2, pp. 325-341.
ROSSITER, Margaret (1995): Women Scientists in America: Before Affirmative Action 1940-1972, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press.
SOLOMON, Joan (1985): “Learning and Evaluation: A Study of School Children’s Views on the Social Uses of Energy”, SSS, vol. 15, n° 2, pp. 343-371.
SOPER, Kate (1995): “Feminism and Ecology: Realism and Rhetoric in the Discourses of Nature”, ST&HV, vol. 20, n° 3, pp. 311-331.
SØRENSEN, Knut (1992): “Towards a Feminized Technology? Gendered Values in the Construction of Technology”, SSS, vol. 22, n° 1, pp. 5-31.
SUE BIX, Amy (1997): “Experiences and Voices of Eugenics Field-Workers: ‘Women’s Work’ in Biology”, SSS, vol. 27, n° 4, pp. 625-688.
SUE BIX, Amy (2002): “Equipped for life: Gendered Technical Training and Consumerism in Home Economics”, 1920-1980», T&C, vol. 43, n° 4, pp. 728-754.
THRALL, C. A. (1982): “The conservative Use of Modern Household Technology”, T&C, vol. 23, n° 2, pp. 175-194.
VAN DER PLOEG, I. (1995): “Hermaphrodite Patients: In Vitro Fertilization and the Transformation of Male Infertility”, ST&HV, vol. 20, n° 4, pp. 460-481.
VANEK, Joann (1978): “Household Technology & Social Status: Rising Standards and Status and Residence Differences in Housework”, T&C, vol. 19, n° 3, pp. 361-375.
WACJMAN, Judy (2002): “La construction mutuelle des techniques et du genre: L’état de recherches en sociologie”, en: Danielle Chabaud-Rychter y Delphine Gardey: L’engendrement des choses, París, Editions des Archives Contemporaines.
WACJMAN, Judy (2000): “Reflections on Gender and Technology Studies: In what state is the art?”, SSS, vol. 30, n° 3, pp. 447-464.
WOOLGAR, Steve (1995): “Introduction”, ST&HV, vol. 20, n° 3, pp. 283-85.
ZACHMANN, Karin (2002): “A Socialist Consumption Junction: Debating the Mechanization of Housework in East Germany, 1956-1957”, T&C, vol. 43, n° 1, pp. 73- 99.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 CC Attribution 4.0
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All CTS's issues and academic articles are under a CC-BY license.
Since 2007, CTS has provided open and free access to all its contents, including the complete archive of its quarterly edition and the different products presented in its electronic platform. This decision is based on the belief that offering free access to published materials helps to build a greater and better exchange of knowledge.
In turn, for the quarterly edition, CTS allows institutional and thematic repositories, as well as personal web pages, to self-archive articles in their post-print or editorial version, immediately after the publication of the final version of each issue and under the condition that a link to the original source will be incorporated into the self-archive.
