II. “Functionalism, Darwinism, and the Psychology of Women” as critical feminist history of psychology: Discourse communities and citation practices

Lee, Shayna Fox; Rutherford, Alexandra; Pettit, Michael

doi:10.1177/0959353516636151

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The issues regarding the processes of publication and citation raised in the article by Unger and Dottolo find further resonance in the paper by Fox Lee, Rutherford, and Pettit (2016). More specifically, Fox Lee et al (2016) address the reception of Shields’ article by two different discourse communities. They remind us that the 1970s witnessed the emergence of the critical history literature alongside the feminist psychology literature.…”

Section: Representation and Visibility Of Women In Psychologymentioning

confidence: 97%

I. Special Focus: Revisiting “the woman question”

Boratav

Clegg

2016

Feminism & Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Greetings, and thank you for publishing with SAGE. We have prepared this page proof for your review. Please respond to each of the below queries by digitally marking this PDF using Adobe Reader. Click "Comment" in the upper right corner of Adobe Reader to access the markup tools as follows: For textual edits, please use the "Annotations" tools. Please refrain from using the two tools crossed out below, as data loss can occur when using these tools. For formatting requests, questions, or other complicated changes, please insert a comment using "Drawing Markups."

show abstract

Section: Representation and Visibility Of Women In Psychologymentioning

confidence: 97%

I. Special Focus: Revisiting “the woman question”

Boratav

Clegg

2016

Feminism & Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Social Networks in the History of Psychology

Pettit

2019

Psychological Studies of Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Doing reflexivity in psychological research: What’s the point? What’s the practice?

Lazard

McAvoy

2017

Qualitative Research in Psychology

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reflexivity is a fundamental expectation of qualitative work in psychology (and the wider social sciences) but what it looks like and how we do it, is frequently ambiguous and implicit. This makes doing reflexivity a challenging endeavour, particularly for those new to using qualitative methodologies. This paper explores reflexivity as a form of critical thinking and evaluation. It does so by demarcating reflexive activity in relation to other forms of critical thinking used in psychology. Using notions of perspectival location, we shed some practical light on the objectives and processes of reflexivity, from its significance in the identification of a research topic, through designing, conducting, and writing up the research report. The overarching question, "what is the point of reflexivity?", is answered through an interrogation of common assumptions around producing 'good' research in psychology as well as through a series of key questions illuminating different steps in the research process. We conclude that reflexivity requires the unpacking of partial, positioned and affective perspectives we bring to the research. This process facilitates our questioning and moves us beyond our own taken-for-granted assumptions and sense-making of the social world.

show abstract

II. “Functionalism, Darwinism, and the Psychology of Women” as critical feminist history of psychology: Discourse communities and citation practices

Cited by 4 publications

References 61 publications

I. Special Focus: Revisiting “the woman question”

I. Special Focus: Revisiting “the woman question”

Social Networks in the History of Psychology

Doing reflexivity in psychological research: What’s the point? What’s the practice?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About