Contextualizing a Life in Science: Janet Taylor Spence and the History of Women and Gender in American Psychology

Rutherford, Alexandra

doi:10.1007/s11199-017-0836-x

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This cohort of women also experienced the emergence of the “separate spheres” for women in psychology, as they were increasingly funneled into careers in applied and developmental psychology. As Rutherford (2017) observed, many women who remained in academic positions also experienced tokenism, were frequently called upon to serve on committees as the sole women in their departments, and in general had to carefully regulate their behavior to avoid being discredited due to their gender. In that vein, Rutherford’s (2017) analysis of the life and career of Janet Spence contextualized her experiences within the structural factors that have affected women’s participation in psychology, and the specific strategies that women have used to navigate an androcentric and sometimes overtly sexist discipline.…”

Section: The View From 25 Years Latermentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical feminist history of psychology versus sociology of scientific knowledge: Contrasting views of women scientists?

Febbraro

2020

Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the rise of second-wave feminism, new theoretical perspectives on women scientists began to emerge. By the 1980s and 1990s, 2 contrasting views of women scientists were discernible. Within the former, critical feminist historians rendered more visible and re/placed the lives and achievements of women psychologists within psychology's history, challenged the "add women and stir" approach to the history of women psychologists, and suggested the need to view history through the lens of women's distinct experiences within sexist scientific structures. Within the sociology of scientific knowledge, the contributions and experiences of women scientists remained largely ignored in favor of a meritocratic, universalistic, and objectivist image of science, despite recognition of the importance of social relations in scientific knowledge production. Today, a comparative analysis of developments within psychology and the sociology of scientific knowledge suggests a more nuanced, less dichotomous juxtaposition of views. Alongside critical feminist history of psychology, objectivist views of women scientists have also remained evident within related psychological subdisciplines, and the sociology of scientific knowledge has seen the emergence of feminist studies of science, technology, and society, on the borders of more traditional, objectivist views. This article reflects on some of the assumptions underlying different views of women scientists, past and present, within these (sub)disciplines. More broadly, this article examines the relevance of new developments in feminist theory and neoliberalism in theorizing women's scientific careers, analyzes conceptualizations of gender discrimination and their implications for theory, and considers whether such (sub)disciplinary comparisons remain pertinent to understanding gendered scientific structures. Public Significance StatementThis article speaks to the need to understand sexist discrimination, and other forms of discrimination, in terms of its multiple, varied, and interconnected manifestations. Discrimination, within science and society, can be both overt and covert, and both informal and formal. As such, discrimination can be expressed in individual "choices," as well as in cultural or other structural constraints. Rather than understanding discrimination narrowly, as distinguishable from culture, discrimination must be understood broadly, as pervasive throughout culture and society. Specifically, this article suggests that the insights of critical feminist historians within psychology, as well as new feminist perspectives within the sociology of science, may provide understandings of women scientists that are more inclusive and contextual, that recognize the pervasiveness of sexist discrimination in all its forms, and that view social relations as complex, as indeterminate, and as inextricably linked to both individual subjectivities and broader scientific and societal structures.

show abstract

Section: The View From 25 Years Latermentioning

confidence: 99%