Linked bibliography for the SEP article "Feminist Perspectives on Science" by Sharon Crasnow, Alison Wylie, Wenda K. Bauchspies and Elizabeth Potter

This is an automatically generated and experimental page

If everything goes well, this page should display the bibliography of the aforementioned article as it appears in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, but with links added to PhilPapers records and Google Scholar for your convenience. Some bibliographies are not going to be represented correctly or fully up to date. In general, bibliographies of recent works are going to be much better linked than bibliographies of primary literature and older works. Entries with PhilPapers records have links on their titles. A green link indicates that the item is available online at least partially.

This experiment has been authorized by the editors of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The original article and bibliography can be found here.

  • American Association of University Women (AAUW), 2010, Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics., Washington, D.C.: AAUW. (Scholar)
  • Anderson, Elizabeth, 2004,“Uses of Value Judgments in Science: A General Argument, With Lessons From a Case Study of Feminist Research on Divorce”, Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy, 19(1): 1–24. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1995a, “Feminist Epistemology: An Interpretation and a Defense”, Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy, 10(3): 50–84. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1995b, “Knowledge, Human Interests, and Objectivity in Feminist Epistemology”, Philosophical Topics, 23(2):27–58. (Scholar)
  • Ardener, Edwin, 1975, “Belief and the Problem of Women”, in Perceiving Women, Shirley Ardener (ed.), London: J. M. Dent and Sons. (Scholar)
  • Ardener, Shirley, (ed.), 1975, Perceiving Women, London: J. M. Dent and Sons. (Scholar)
  • Barad, Karen, 2007, Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning, Durham, NC: Duke University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––,2003, “Posthumanist Performativity: Toward and Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter”, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28: 801–831. (Scholar)
  • Biagioli, Mario, (ed.), 1999, The Science Studies Reader, Routledge: New York. (Scholar)
  • Bleier, Ruth, (ed.), 1986, Feminist Approaches to Science, New York: Routledge (Scholar)
  • Blizzard, Deborah, 2007, Looking Within: A Socio-cultural Examination of Fetoscopy, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Scholar)
  • Brumfiel, Elizabeth M., 1991, “Weaving and Cooking: Women's Production in Aztec Mexico,” in Joan M. Gero and Margaret W. Conkey (eds.), Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Oxford: Blackwell. (Scholar)
  • Bug, Amy, 2003, “Has Feminism Changed Physics?”, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28: 881–899. (Scholar)
  • Campion, Patricia and Wesley Shrum, 2004, “Gender and Science in Development: Women Scientists in Ghana, Kenya and India”, Science Technology and Human Values, 29: 459–485. (Scholar)
  • Chilly Collective, 1995, Breaking Anonymity: The Chilly Climate for Women Faculty, Waterloo ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press. (Scholar)
  • Clarke, Adele. E. and Virginia L. Olesen (eds.), 1999, Revisioning Women, Health and Healing: Feminist, Cultural and Technoscience Perspectives, New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • Clough, Sharyn, 2012, “The Analytic Tradition, Radical (Feminist) Interpretation, and the Hygiene Hypothesis,” in Out From the Shadows: Analytical Contributions to Traditional Philosophy, Sharon L. Crasnow and Anita M. Superson (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––,2011,“Gender and the Hygiene Hypothesis,” Social Science and Medicine 72(4): 486–493. (Scholar)
  • –––,2003a,Beyond Epistemology: A Pragmatist Approach to Feminist Science Studies, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2003b, “Introduction,” in Siblings Under the Skin: Feminism, Social Justice and Analytic Philosophy, Sharyn Clough (ed.), Aurora, CO: Davies Group Publishers. (Scholar)
  • –––and William E. Loges, 2008, “Racist Value Judgments as Objectively False Beliefs: A Philosophical and Social-Psychological Analysis,” Journal of Social Philosophy, 39(1): 77–95. (Scholar)
  • Code, Lorraine,1993, “Taking Subjectivity Into Account,” Feminist Epistemologies, Elizabeth Potter and Linda M. Alcoff (eds.), New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1991, What Can She Know?, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. (Scholar)
  • Cole, Jonathan R., 1979, Fair Science: Women in the Scientific Community, New York: The Free Press. (Scholar)
  • Cole, Jonathan R. and Burton Singer, 1991, “A Theory of Limited Differences: Explaining the Productivity Puzzle in Science”, in The Outer Circle: Women in the Scientific Community, Harriet Zuckerman, Jonathan R. Cole, and John T. Bruer (eds.), New York: W. W. Norton. (Scholar)
  • Collins, Paticia Hill, 1986, “Learning from the Outsider Within: The Sociological Significance of Black Feminist Thought,” Social Problems 33 (Special Theory Issue): S14–S32. (Scholar)
  • Crasnow, Sharon, 2014,“Feminist Standpoint Theory,” in Philosophy of Social Science: A New Introduction, Nancy Cartwright and Eleonora Montuschi (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––,2013,“Feminist Philosophy of Science: Values and Objectivity,” Philosophy Compass, 8(4): 413–423. (Scholar)
  • Dahlberg, Frances, (ed.), 1981, Woman the Gatherer, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. (Scholar)
  • DeVault, Marjorie, 1999, Liberating Method: Feminism and Social Research, Philadephia, PA: Temple University Press. (Scholar)
  • Douglas, Heather, 2009, Science, Policy, and the Value Free Ideal, Pittsburgh, PA: Pittsburgh University Press. (Scholar)
  • Ehrlich, Carol and Research Group One, 1975, The Conditions of Feminist Research, Baltimore MD: Vacant Lots Press. (Scholar)
  • Eichler, Margrit, 1988, Nonsexist Research Methods: A Practical Guide, Boston: Allen & Unwin. (Scholar)
  • Eichler, Margrit and Jeanne Lapointe, 1985, On the Treatment of the Sexes in Research, Ottawa: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. (Scholar)
  • Fausto-Sterling, Anne, 1985, Myths of Gender: Biological Theories About Women and Men, New York: Basic Books. (Scholar)
  • Fedigan, Linda Marie, 1986, “The Changing Role of Women in Models of Human Evolution,” American Review of Anthropology, 15: 25–66. (Scholar)
  • Fedigan, Linda Marie, and Laurence Fedigan, 1989, “Gender and the Study of Primates”, in Critical Reviews of Gender and Anthropology, S. Morgan, (ed.), Washington, DC: American Anthropological Association. (Scholar)
  • Fonow, Mary Margaret and Judith A. Cook (eds.), 1991, Beyond Methodology: Feminist Scholarship as Lived Research, Bloomington, Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press. (Scholar)
  • Fortmann, Louise (ed.), 2008, Participatory Research in Conservation and Rural Livelihoods: Doing Science Together, London: Wiley-Blackwell. (Scholar)
  • Fujimura, Joan H., 2006, “Sex Genes: A Critical Sociomaterial Approach to the Politics and Molecular Genetics of Sex Determination”, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 32: 49–82. (Scholar)
  • Gilligan, Carol, 1982, In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Scholar)
  • Ginther, Donna K., 2004, “Why Women Earn Less: Economic Explanations for the Gender Salary Gap in Science”, AWIS Magazine, 33: 6–10. (Scholar)
  • Goodman, Alan H., Deborah Heath, and M. Susan Lindee (eds.), 2003, Genetic Nature/Culture: Anthropology and Science beyond the Two-Culture Divide. Berkeley: University of California Press. (Scholar)
  • Gorelick, Sherry, 1991, “Contradictions of Feminist Methodology”, Gender & Society, 5: 459–77. (Scholar)
  • Gottfried, Heidi, (ed.), 1996, Feminism and Social Change: Bridging Theory and Practice, Urbana IL: University of Illinois Press. (Scholar)
  • Greaves, Lorraine and Alison Wylie, 1995, “Women and Violence: Feminist Practice and Quantitative Method”, in Changing Methods: Feminist Transforming Practice, Sandra Burt and Lorraine Code, (eds.), Peterborough ON: Broadview Press. (Scholar)
  • Greenwood, Mary Rita Cooke, 2000, “Who Will Do the Science of the Future?: A Symposium on Careers of Women in Science”, 57–74. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press. (Scholar)
  • Griffin, Susan, 1979, Woman and Nature: The Roaring Inside Her, London: The Woman's Press, Ltd. (Scholar)
  • Hall, Kim Q., 2002, “Feminism, Disability, and Embodiment”, NWSA Journal, Special Issue: Feminist Disability Studies, 14: vii–xii. (Scholar)
  • Hall, Roberta and Bernice Sandler, 1984, “Out of the Classroom: A Chilly Campus Climate for Women?”, Washington DC: Association of American Colleges. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1982, “The Classroom Climate: A Chilly One for Women?”, Washington DC: Association of American Colleges. (Scholar)
  • Hammonds, Evelynn and Banu Subramanian, 2003, “A Conversation on Feminist Science Studies,” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3): 923–944. (Scholar)
  • Haraway, Donna, 1991, Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, New York, Routledge. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1989, Primate Visions: Gender, Race, and Nature in the World of Modern Science, New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • Harding, Sandra, 2006, Science and Social Inequality: Feminist and Postcolonial Issues, Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2004a, “Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: What is ‘Strong Objectivity?’”in The Feminist Standpoint Reader, Sandra Harding (ed.), New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2004b, “A Socially Relevant Philosophy of Science? Resources from Standpoint Theory's Controversality,”Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy, 19(1): 25–47. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1997, “Comment on Hekman's ‘Truth and Method: Feminist Standpoint Theory Revisited’: Whose Standpoint Needs the Regimes of Truth and Reality?”, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 22: 382–391. (Scholar)
  • –––, (ed.), 1993, The “Racial” Economy of Science: Toward a Democratic Future, Bloomington: Indiana University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1991, Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women's Lives, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1987, “Is There a Feminist Method?”, in Feminism and Methodology, Sandra Harding, (ed.), Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1986, The Science Question in Feminism, Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press. (Scholar)
  • Hastorf, Christine A., 1991, “Gender, Space, and Food in Prehistory,” in Joan M. Gero and Margaret W. Conkey (eds.), Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Oxford: Blackwell. (Scholar)
  • Hess, David J., 1997, Science Studies: An advanced Introduction, New York: New York University Press. (Scholar)
  • Hesse-Biber, Sharlene, (ed.), 2007, Handbook of Feminist Research, New York: Sage. (Scholar)
  • Hesse-Biber, Sharlene and Michelle L. Yaiser, 2004, Feminist Perspectives on Social Research, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
  • Hickey, Samuel, and Giles Mohan, eds. , 2004, Participation: From Tyranny to Transformation? Exploring New Approaches to Participation in Development, New York: Zed Books. (Scholar)
  • Hubbard, R., 2003, “Science, Power, Gender: How DNA Became the Book of Life”, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28: 791–799. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1990, The Politics of Women's Biology New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. (Scholar)
  • Irigaray, Luce, 1989, “Is the Subject of Science Sexed?” in Feminism and Science. N. Tuana (ed.). Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press: 58–68. (Scholar)
  • Jacobson, Helga E., 1977, “How to Study Your Own Community: Research from the Perspective of Women.” Vancouver, B.C.: Women's Research Center. (Scholar)
  • Kafer, Alison, 2003, “Compulsory Bodies: Reflections on Heterosexuality and Able-bodiedness”, Journal of Women's History, 15: 77–89 (Scholar)
  • Keller, Evelyn Fox, 1995, “The Origin, History, and Politics of the Subject Called ‘Gender and Science’: A First Person Account”, Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, James C. Petersen and Trevor Pinch (eds.), Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1992, Secrets of Life, Secrets of Death: Essays on Language, Gender and Science, New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1985, Reflections on Gender and Science, New Haven: Yale University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1983, A Feeling for the Organism: The Life and Work of Barbara McClintock, New York: W. H. Freeman and Company. (Scholar)
  • Kitcher, Philip, 2011, Science in a Democratic Society, Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2003, Science, Truth, and Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
  • Kittay, Eva, Anita Silvers, and Susan Wendell (eds.) 2001, Hypatia (Special Issue: Feminism and Disability), 16(4). (Scholar)
  • Kohlstedt, Sally Gregory, and Longino, Helen, 1997, “The Woman, Gender, and Science Question: What Do Research on Women in Science and Research on Gender Have to do with Each Other?” Osiris, 2nd Series, 12: 3–15. (Scholar)
  • Lacey, Hugh, 1999, Is Science Value Free?, New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • Layne, Linda, 2002, Motherhood Lost: A Feminist Account of Pregnancy Loss in America, New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • Lee, Richard B. and Irven DeVore, (eds.), 1968, Man the Hunter, Chicago: Aldine. (Scholar)
  • Lerner, Barron H., 2001, The Breast Cancer Wars: Hope, Fear and the Pursuit of a Cure in Twentieth-Century America, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
  • Levins, Richard, and Richard Lewontin, 1985, The Dialectical Biologist, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. (Scholar)
  • Lloyd, Elisabeth, 2005, The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias in the Science of Evolution, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1995, “Objectivity and the Double Standard for Feminist Epistemologies”, Synthese, 104: 351–381. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1993, “Pre-Theoretical Assumptions in Evolutionary Explanations of Female Sexuality”, Philosophical Studies, 69: 139–53. (Scholar)
  • Longino, Helen E., 2012, Studying Human Behavior: How Scientists Investigate Aggression and Sexuality, Chicago, IL:Chicago University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2002, The Fate of Knowledge, Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1995, “Gender, Politics, and the Theoretical Virtues”, Synthese, 104: 383–97. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1994, “In Search of Feminist Epistemology”, The Monist, 77: 472–85. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1993, “Subjects, Power, and Knowledge: Description and Prescription in Feminist Philosophies of Science”, in Feminist Epistemologies, Linda M. Alcoff and Elizabeth Potter (eds.), New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1990, Science As Social Knowledge, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1987, “Can There Be a Feminist Science?”, Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy, 2: 51–64. (Scholar)
  • Longino, Helen, and Ruth Doell, 1983, “Body, Bias, and Behavior: A Comparative Analysis of Reasoning in Two Areas of Biological Science”, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 9: 206–27. (Scholar)
  • Lorde, Audre, 1984, “The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master's House”, in Sister Outsider, Audre Lorde, (ed.), Freedom CA: The Crossing Press. (Scholar)
  • Maddox, Brenda, 2002, Rosalind Franklin: The Dark Lady of DNA, New York: Harper Collins. (Scholar)
  • Maguire, Patricia, 1987, Doing Participatory Research: A Feminist Approach, Amherst, MA: The Center for International education, University of Massachusetts. (Scholar)
  • Martin, Emily, 1994, Flexible Bodies: Tracking Immunity in American Culture From the Days of Polio to the Age of Aids, Boston: Beacon Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1991, “The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles”, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 16: 485-501. (Scholar)
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1999, “A Study on the Status of Women Faculty in Science at MIT”, The MIT Faculty Newsletter, 11: PAGES. (Scholar)
  • Mayberry, Maralee, Buna Subramaniam, and Lisa Weasel (eds.), 2001, Feminist Science Studies: A New Generation, New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • Merchant, Carolyn, 1980/90, The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution, New York: Harper and Row. (Scholar)
  • Mies, Maria, 1983, “Towards a Methodology for Feminist Research”, in Theories of Women's Studies, Gloria Bowles and Renate D. Klein, (eds.), London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Scholar)
  • Minkler, Meredith and Nina B. Wallerstein (eds.), 2003, Community Based Participatory Research for Health. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (Scholar)
  • Naples, Nancy A., 2003, Feminism and Method: Ethnography, Discourse Analysis, and Activist Research, New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • National Academies of Sciences, Committee on Maximizing the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering, 2007, Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering, Washington D.C.: The National Academies Press. (Scholar)
  • Nelson, Lynn Hankinson 1996, “Empiricism Without Dogmas,” in Feminism, Science and the Philosophy of Science, Lynn H. Nelson and Jack Nelson (eds.), Dordrecht, Boston and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1995, “Feminist Naturalized Philosophy of Science”, Synthese, 104: 399–421. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1993, “Epistemological Communities”, in Linda M. Alcoff and Elizabeth Potter (eds.), Feminist Epistemologies, New York and London: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1990, Who Knows: From Quine to a Feminist Empiricism, Philadelphia: Temple University Press. (Scholar)
  • Novick, Peter, 1988, That Noble Dream: The ‘Objectivity Question’ and the American Historical Profession, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
  • Paxton, Pamela, 2000, “Women's Suffrage and the Measurement of Democracy: Problems of Operationalization,” Studies in Comparative International Development 43: 92–111. (Scholar)
  • Pérez Sedeño, E., 2001, “Gender: The Missing Factor in STS”, in Visions of STS: Counterpoints in Science, Technology and Society Studies, Stephen H. Cutcliffe and Carl Mitcham (eds.), Albany: SUNY Press. (Scholar)
  • Pinnick, Cassandra, 2005, “The Failed Feminist Challenge to ‘Fundamental Epistemology’,” Science & Education, 14: 103–16. (Scholar)
  • Pohlhaus, Gaile, 2002, “Knowing Communities: An Investigation of Harding's Standpoint Epistemology,” Social Epistemology, 16(3): 283–293. (Scholar)
  • Potter, Elizabeth, 2001, Gender and Boyle's Law of Gases, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1995, “Good Science and Good Philosophy of Science”, Synthese, 104: 423–439. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1988, “Modeling the Gender Politics in Science”, Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy, 3: 19–34. (Scholar)
  • Ramey, Estelle, 1992, “A Look at Gender in Science: Review of The Outer Circle: Women in the Scientific Community, Edited by Harriet Zuckerman, Jonathan R. Cole, and John T. Bruer”, The Washington Post, April 1 1992, 1. (Scholar)
  • Rapp, Rayna, 1999, Testing Women Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America, New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • Reardon, Jenny, 2005, Race to the Finish: Identity and Governance in an Age of Genomics, Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Scholar)
  • Reinharz, Shulamith, 1992a, Feminist Methods in Social Research, New York: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1992b, “The Principles of Feminist Research: A Matter of Debate”, in The Knowledge Explosion: Generations of Feminist Scholarship, in Cheris Kramarae and Dale Spender, (eds.), New York: Teachers College Press. (Scholar)
  • Richardson, Sarah, 2013, Sex Itself: The Search for Male and Female in the Human Genome, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. (Scholar)
  • Rolin, Kristina, 2009, “Standpoint Theory as a Methodology for the Study of Power Relations,”Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy 24(4): 218–226. (Scholar)
  • Rolison, Debra R., 2000, “A ‘Title IX’ Challenge to Academic Chemistry-Isn't a Millennium of Affirmative Action for White Men Sufficient?” Women in the Chemical Workforce, Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 74–93, [available online]
  • Roofless Women (Roofless Women's Action Research Mobilization), 1997, “Lifting the Voices of Homeless Women: Summary of Findings and Recommendations,” Boston, MA: Women's Institute for Housing and Economic Development. (Scholar)
  • Rose, Hilary, 1994, Love, Power and Knowledge: Towards a Feminist Transformation of the Sciences, Cambridge, MA: Polity Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1983, “Hand, Brain, and Heart: A Feminist Epistemology for the Natural Sciences”, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 9: 73–90. (Scholar)
  • Rosser, Sue V., 2002, “Twenty_five Years of NWSA: Have We Built the Two_Way Streets Between Women's Studies and Women in Science and Technology?” NWSA Journal, 14: 103–28. (Scholar)
  • Rossiter, Margaret, 1995, Women Scientists in America: Before Affirmative Action, 1940–1972, Baltimore, MC: Johns Hopkins University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1982, Women Scientists in America: Struggles and Strategies to 1940, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins. (Scholar)
  • Sandler, Bernice R., 1986, “The Campus Climate Revisited: Chilly for Women Faculty, Administrators, and Graduate Students”, in Project on the Status and Education of Women, Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges. (Scholar)
  • Schiebinger, Londa, (ed.), 2003, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1999a, Has Feminism Changed Science?, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1999b, “How Women Contribute”, Science (New Series), 285: 835. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1989, The Mind Has No Sex? Women in the Origins of Modern Science, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
  • Scott, Joan W., 1991, “The Evidence of Experience”, Critical Inquiry, 17: 773–97. (Scholar)
  • Seymour, Elaine and Hewitt, Nancy M., 1997, Talking about Leaving: Why Undergraduates Leave the Sciences, Boulder, Colorado: Westview. (Scholar)
  • Shalala, Donna E., 2007, “Preface”, in Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering, National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Maximizing the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering, Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. (Scholar)
  • Slocum, Sally, 1975, “Woman the Gatherer: Male Bias in Anthropology”, in Toward an Anthropology of Women, Rayna R. Reiter, (ed.), New York: Monthly Review Press. (Scholar)
  • Smith, Dorothy E., 1987, The Everyday World As Problematic, Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1978, “A Peculiar Eclipsing: Women's Exclusion from Man's Culture”, Women's Studies International Quarterly, 1: 281–95. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1974, “Women's Perspective as a Radical Critique of Sociology”, Sociological Inquiry, 44: 7–13. (Scholar)
  • Solomon, Miriam, 2012, “The Web of Valief: An Assessment of Feminist Radical Empiricism,” in Out From the Shadows: Analytical Feminist Contributions to Traditional Philosophy, Sharon L. Crasnow and Anita M. Superson (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2001, Social Empiricism, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Scholar)
  • Sonnert, Gerhard and Gerald Holton, 1995, Who Succeeds in Science? The Gender Dimension, New Brunswick NJ: Rutgers University Press. (Scholar)
  • Spanier, Bonnie B., 1995, Im/Partial Science: Gender Ideology in Molecular Biology, Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press. (Scholar)
  • Sperling, Susan, 1991, “Baboons with Briefcases: Feminism, Functionalism, and Sociobiology in the Evolution of Primate Gender”, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 17: 1–27. (Scholar)
  • Squier, Susan and Littlefield, Melissa, 2004, “Feminist Theory and/of Science: Feminist Theory Special Issue”, Feminist Theory, 5: 123–232. (Scholar)
  • Stanley, Liz and Sue Wise, 1983, Breaking Out: Feminist Consciousness and Feminist Research, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Scholar)
  • Star, Susan Leigh, (ed.), 1995, Ecologies of Knowledge: Work and Politics in Science and Technology, Albany: SUNY Press. (Scholar)
  • Steele, Claude M., 1997, “A Threat in the Air: How Stereotypes Shape Intellectual Identity and Performance”, American Psychologist, 52: 613–29. (Scholar)
  • Stewart, Abigail, et al., 1997, Separating Together, New York: Guilford Press. (Scholar)
  • Strum, Shirley C. and Linda Marie Fedigan, (eds.), 2000, Primate Encounters: Models of Science, Gender, and Society, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Scholar)
  • Suchman, Lucy, 2008, “Feminist STS and the Sciences of the Artificial”, in The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, Third Edition Edward J. Hackett, Olga Amsterdamska, Michael E. Lynch, and Judy Wajcman (eds.) Cambridge, Massachusetts and London: The MIT Press, 139–164. (Scholar)
  • Summers, Lawrence H., 2005, Remarks at NBER Conference on Diversity in the Science and Engineering Workforce, Harvard University, Office of the President, January 14, 2005, available online (accessed January 16, 2015). (Scholar)
  • Traweek, Sharon, 1988, Beamtimes and Lifetimes: The World of High Energy Physicists, Cambridge: Harvard University Press (Scholar)
  • Tuana, Nancy, (ed.), 1989, Feminism and Science, Bloomington: Indiana University Press. (Scholar)
  • Valian, Vivian, 1999, Why So Slow? The Advancement of Women, Cambridge MA: MIT Press. (Scholar)
  • Wallerstein, Judith and Joan Kelly, 1980, Surviving the Breakup, New York: Basic. (Scholar)
  • Watson, Patty Jo and Mary C. Kennedy, 1991, “The Development of Horticulture in the Eastern Woodlands of North America: Women's Role”, in J.M. Gero and M.W. Conkey (eds.) Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Oxford: Blackwell. (Scholar)
  • Wertheim, Margaret, 1995, Pythagoras' Trousers: God, Physics and the Gender Wars, New York: Random House. (Scholar)
  • West, Martha and John Curtis, 2006, “AAUP Faculty Gender Equity Indicators”, Washington D.C.: American Association of University Professors. (Scholar)
  • Whelan, Emma, 2001, “Politics by Other Means: Feminism and Mainstream Science Studies”, Canadian Journal of Sociology/ Cahiers canadiens de sociologie, 26: 535–581. (Scholar)
  • Wilmsen, Carl, Wiliam F. Elemendorf, Larry Fisher, Jacquelyn Ross, Brinda Sarathy, and Gail Wells (eds.), 2008, Partnerships for Empowerment: Participatory Research for Community-Based Natural Resource Management, London: Earthscan Publications. (Scholar)
  • Woolf, Virginia, 1938, Three Guineas, London: Hogarth Press. (Scholar)
  • Wyer, Mary, Donna Cookmeyer, Mary Barbercheck, Hatice Ozturk, and Marta Wayne (eds.), 2001, Women, Science and Technology: A Reader in Feminist Science Studies, New York & London: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • Wylie, Alison, 2007, “The Feminism Question in Science: What Does It Mean to ‘Do Social Science as a Feminist’?”, in Handbook of Feminist Research, Sharlene Hesse-Biber, New York: Sage. (Scholar)
  • –––, 2003, “Why Standpoint Theory Matters: Feminist Standpoint Theory”, in Philosophical Explorations of Science, Technology, and Diversity, Robert Figueroa and Sandra Harding, (eds.), New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1997, “Good Science, Bad Science, or Science as Usual?: Feminist Critiques of Science”, in Women in Human Evolution, Lori D. Hager, (ed.), New York: Routledge. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1995, “The Contexts of Activism on ‘Climate’ Issues,” in Breaking Anonymity, in The Chilly Collective (eds.), Waterloo Ont: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 26–60. (Scholar)
  • –––, 1992, “Reasoning About Ourselves: Feminist Methodology in the Social Sciences”, in Women and Reason, Elizabeth Harvey and Kathleen Okruhlik, (eds.), Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press, 611–624. (Scholar)
  • Wylie, Alison, Janet R. Jakobsen, Gisela Fosado, 2008, Women, Work, and the Academy: Strategies for Responding to ‘Post-civil Rights Era’ Gender Discrimination, New Feminist Solutions, New York: Barnard Center for Research on Women, available online (accessed January 15, 2015). (Scholar)
  • Xie, Yu and Kimberlee A. Shauman, 2003, Women in Science: Career Processes and Outcomes, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. (Scholar)
  • Young, Rebecca M., and Evan Balaban, 2006, “Psychoneuroindoctrinology”, (review of Brizendine 2006), Nature, 443 (12 October): 634. (Scholar)
  • Zare, Richard N., 2006, “Sex, Lies, and Title IX”, Chemical & Engineering News, 84(20): 46–49, available online (accessed January 16, 2015 (Scholar)

Generated Sun Feb 11 07:14:24 2018