Search results

The purpose of this paper is to engage with a foundational gendered imaginary in Western medical and popular discourse regarding fetal sexual development. It is an imaginary that consists of dual narratives that bolster an oppositional complementary model of sex-gender. By these accounts male sexual development results from complex and multi-faceted processes generated by the Y chromosome while female sexual development is straightforward, articulated through a discourse of “default sex” (Jost, 1953). Such apparent truths fit seamlessly with the timeworn notion of maleness and masculinity as always already active, and femaleness and femininity always and inevitably passive. In other words, he does and she is.

Despite embryogenetic findings thoroughly debunking these ideas, contemporary medical and biological textbooks remain haunted by outdated androcentric models of sex development. This paper attends to biomedical and everyday understandings of sex and gender to demonstrate how fresh lines of inquiry produce conditions that enable new ways of understanding bodies and embodied experiences.

This paper demonstrates how new ways of thinking can lead to a new understanding with regards to sex, gender, bodies, and experiences.

This paper attends to biomedical and everyday understandings of sex and gender to demonstrate how fresh lines of inquiry produce conditions that enable new ways of understanding bodies and embodied experiences.

A longstanding quantitative finding from surveys of public perceptions of hazardous technologies is that women and men respondents tend to express different levels of concern when asked about environmental and technological hazards. Traditional psychometric risk perception research has provided extensive empirical descriptions of this “gender effect”, but is criticised for having less success in developing substantive theory linking observations to socio‐cultural explanations to explicate this effect. The purpose of this paper is to build a theoretical platform to account for the existing empirical findings on gender and perceptions of risk.

The paper presents a critical synthesis, drawing upon theory in contemporary risk research, gender theory, social studies of science and feminist studies of epistemology.

A theoretical platform is developed concerning the operation of gender as a regulatory process involving norms and discourse. The role is identified of moral discourses, hegemonic masculinities/gender authenticity, and epistemic subjectivities as plausible ways of understanding the gender–risk effect in risk perception.

A novel theoretical exploration is provided of the relationship between gender and risk perceptions. Conceptual development in the gender and risk arena could be further refined by applying the theoretical platform developed here to empirical analyses and, to investigate its relevance to understanding how people discuss, deliberate and reason about risk issues.

Much of the existing literature fails to offer adequately grounded theoretical explanations for the observed empirical finding on gender and risk. This paper is the first to utilise a non‐essentialist reading of the gender‐risk effect by developing the “effects made by gender” approach.

Information seeking for child-rearing is an increasingly popular topic in the medical and social science literature, though a theoretical framework in which to understand this phenomenon is still missing. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

The authors present results from a qualitative research in which data were obtained from 21 interviews and the personal experience of one of the authors. Participants were all mothers supportive of attachment parenting, a parenting style inspired by attachment theory which advocates making parenting decisions on a strong basis of information. They were recruited in several Spanish autonomous communities and interviewed between April and July 2015.

Results were analyzed using grounded theory and allowed to define five major themes: becoming a mother implies a new perception of oneself in which it is common to feel more in need for information; the need to search for information originates in situations of “conflict” or crisis, or as a consequence of conflicting information; information is judged and weighed on the basis of affect and perceptions; scientific and experiential knowledge are valued as complementary; and finally, information seeking appears as one activity of identity work.

Placing conflict, instead of uncertainty, at the beginning of the search process allows to emphasize the role of information seeking in mediating relationships and interactions at a societal level. From this point of view, the authors understand that LIS should pay more attention to information seeking as an important factor in social change.

The purpose of this paper is to make visible the field's propensity to center whiteness even in engaging inclusive practices in information literacy classrooms. This paper offers abolitionist pedagogy as a means to understand and address these concerns.

This paper uses interdisciplinary research methods in the fields of education, library science, feminist studies, Black studies and abolition studies to examine and provide an analysis of current information literacy practices by using abolitionist pedagogy to articulate how it is possible to expand information literacy instruction practices.

Current information literacy practices and methods that seek to create inclusive learning environments for racialized and minoritized learners rely on a set of institutionalized practices such as critical information literacy and culturally sustaining pedagogies. An examination of these practices through an abolitionist pedagogical lens reveals how the field has engaged in reductive and uncritical engagement with these methods despite employing them to create inclusive spaces. Using abolitionist pedagogy as a lens, this critical essay examines the field's foundations in whiteness and illustrates pathways for transformative educational justice.

There has been much work on inclusive teaching practices that discusses challenging information literacy structures' reliance on dominant culture.? To date, there has been little to no scholarship on how information literacy practices could engage in abolitionist pedagogical praxis.

The purpose of this paper is to propose that in order to tackle the question of bias in algorithms, a systemic, sociotechnical and holistic perspective is needed. With reference to the term “algorithmic culture,” the interconnectedness and mutual shaping of society and technology are postulated. A sociotechnical approach requires translational work between and across disciplines. This conceptual paper undertakes such translational work. It exemplifies how gender and diversity studies, by bringing in expertise on addressing bias and structural inequalities, provide a crucial source for analyzing and mitigating bias in algorithmic systems.

After introducing the sociotechnical context, an overview is provided regarding the contemporary discourse around bias in algorithms, debates around algorithmic culture, knowledge production and bias identification as well as common solutions. The key concepts of gender studies (situated knowledges and strong objectivity) and concrete examples of gender bias then serve as a backdrop for revisiting contemporary debates.

The key concepts reframe the discourse on bias and concepts such as algorithmic fairness and transparency by contextualizing and situating them. The paper includes specific suggestions for researchers and practitioners on how to account for social inequalities in the design of algorithmic systems.

A systemic, gender-informed approach for addressing the issue is provided, and a concrete, applicable methodology toward a situated understanding of algorithmic bias is laid out, providing an important contribution for an urgent multidisciplinary dialogue.

The paper has two purposes: to introduce a new perspective on power and resistance in equalities work; and to trouble either or theorisations of success and failure in this work. Instead it offers a new means of exploring micro‐practice.

The paper applies/develops an “actor network theory” (ANT) analysis to a single case study of Iopia, a Black woman equalities practitioner working in a prison education context. It uses this to explore the ways in which Iopia interacts with a variety of human and non‐human objects to challenge racism in this context.

Iopia, from an initial position of marginality (as a Black woman experiencing racism) is able to establish herself (by virtue of this same identity as a Black woman combating racism) as central to a “new” network for equality and diversity. This new network both challenges and sustains narrow exclusionary definitions of diversity. Thus, Iopia's case provides an example of the contradictions, and paradox, experienced by those working for equality and diversity.

In the future, this type of feminist ANT analysis could be more fully developed and integrated with critical race and other critical cultural theories as these relate to equalities work.

The approach, and, in particular, the notion of translation, can be used by practitioners in thinking through the ways in which they can use material objects to draw in multiple “others” into their own networks.

The article is one of the first to explore equalities workers via the lens of ANT. It is unique in its analysis of the material objects constituting both diversity workers and diversity work and thus its analysis of diversity workers and their work as part of a complex set of social and “material” relations.

This paper aims to develop an original Café Delphi historical method to research women's individual and collective experiences of sex, sexuality and sexism in public relations (PR) in 1990s’ Britain.

An original Café Delphi historical method is shaped by an interpretive paradigm providing a conceptual framework to model sex, sexuality and sexism. This approaches history as a social science drawing on hermeneutic phenomenology, reflexivity and ethics of care. A case study, employing oral history and participatory action research (PAR), is used to develop and test the practicality of the original Café Delphi historical method to research women's individual and collective experiences of PR in 1990s’ Britain.

Three main findings are identified. (1) Developing a new method is complex, time-consuming and surfaces practical problems; however, the Café Delphi historical method is a viable way to explore individual and collective experiences. (2) Undertaking methodological innovation and innovating research methods involves action learning and requires agility, reflexivity and ability to navigate messiness and order. (3) Testing the multiphase mixed method study revealed its power and potential as an ethical and collaborative co-research approach.

This study expands the repertoire of research methods in PR historiography and provides a new approach to capture collective as well as individual experiences. This study develops a feminine analytic tool employing metamodern oscillation to connect past, present and future.

The authors suggest that the research-to-practice gap, such as that found in evidence-based management, is due in part to a lack of attention to embodied knowledge. The recommendation is for change agents to bring attention to embodied knowing when implementing change based on research. The purpose of the paper is to address the research-to-practice gap.

This is a conceptual paper that considers limitations of the predominant approach to considering the research-to-practice gap. The literature on phenomenology, feminist theory, and learning theory form the basis for exploring these challenges as well as possible solutions for transcending the research-to-practice gap.

Strategic opportunities for introducing increased corporeal understanding are advanced. The suggestions address the research-to-practice gap at three critical stages of research-based change initiatives. These include making embodied knowledge integral to change initiatives in framing research, reducing resistance, and increasing acceptance. Among the specific strategies discussed are attending to tacit knowledge when considering the change, embracing the embrained body including attending to kinesthetic resistance and starting with the body to increase acceptance when implementing change.

There has been very little previous attention to the corporeal in management research and practice, including in the organizational change literature. This paper not only increases this discussion significantly but also provides suggestions for how to move forward in practice.

The purpose of this paper is to build on contemporary intersectional literature to develop a grounded methodological framework for the study of social differences.

A systematic literature review serves as the foundation for a discussion of the challenges associated with intersectional research. The findings assist in positioning the proposed methodological framework within recent intersectional debates.

The review shows a rise in intersectional publications since the birth of the “intersectionality” term in 1989. Moreover, the paper points to four tensions within the field: a tension between looking at or beyond oppression; a tension between structural-oriented and process-oriented perspectives; an apparent incommensurability among the macro, meso, and micro levels of analysis; and a lack of coherent methodology.

On the basis of the highlighted tensions in contemporary research as well as the limitations of that research, the present presents a methodological framework and a discussion of the implications of that framework for the wider diversity literature.

The paper suggests an empirically grounded approach to studying differences. This provides an opportunity, for scholars and practitioners, to reassess possible a priori given assumptions, and open up to new explorations beyond conventional identity theorization.

The paper suggests a need for an empirically grounded approach to studying social differences, which would not only create an opportunity to reassess common assumptions but also open up for explorations beyond conventional identity theorizations.

The framework departs from traditional (critical) diversity scholarship, as it is process oriented but still emphasizes stable concepts. Moreover, it does not give primacy to oppression. Finally, it adopts a critical stance on the nature of the macro, meso, and micro levels as dominant analytical perspectives. As a result, this paper focusses on the importance of intersectionality as a conceptual tool for exploring social differences.