The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Intersectionality as a Normative and Empirical Paradigm
Abstract
In the 10 years that I have conducted intersectional research, my views have changed significantly in terms of how I conceptualize the subspecialization. Originally I thought of intersectionality as a content-based specialization that emphasized the subjectivity of women who reside at the intersections of race-, gender-, class-, and sexual orientation–based marginalizations (and other categories of difference). Thinking of it in this way, with a focus on content, follows the logic of much groundbreaking work in women's studies and women and politics scholarship. The primary pursuit of this focus is inclusion – incorporating previously ignored and excluded populations into preexisting frameworks to broaden our knowledge base regarding traditional questions of political science. For example, examining gender differences in voting behavior, party identification, candidate recruitment, and social movements has contributed critical knowledge to the discipline of political science.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“some theorists have re-framed intersectionality as a theory of the complexity of intersecting identities and power dynamics (Davis, 2008: Hancock, 2007:249-50), especially how privileged dominant groups of whites and men oppress, subordinate and marginalize nonwhite minorities and women, erasing them from history (May, 2014).”
From Introduction to Archaeologies Special Issue on Intersectionality Theory and Research in Historical Archaeology (2022) · cites this paper as Hancock, 2007
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Intersectionality and research in psychology
Cole, E. R. (2009) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/a0014564 · Cited by 2,722
Intersectionality's Definitional Dilemmas
Collins, P. H. (2015) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-073014-112142 · Cited by 2,419
Beyond dichotomies: gender and intersecting inequalities in climate change studies
Djoudi, H., Locatelli, B., Vaast, C., Asher, K., Brockhaus, M., & Basnett Sijapati, B. (2016) · Ambio · doi:10.1007/s13280-016-0825-2 · Cited by 431
Le blanchiment de l’intersectionnalité
Bilge, S. (2015) · Recherches féministes · doi:10.7202/1034173ar · Cited by 131
Goethals, T., Schauwer, E. D., & Hove, G. V. (2015) · DiGeSt. Journal of Diversity and Gender Studies · doi:10.11116/jdivegendstud.2.1-2.0075 · Cited by 102
Metadata
- Authors
- Hancock, A.-M.
- Venue
- Politics & Gender
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2007-06
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 248-254
- ISSN
- 1743-923X
- 1743-9248
- Cited by
- 456
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review