Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 334

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Boundaries, Negotiation, Consciousness: Reconceptualizing Gender Relations

Gerson, Judith M., Peiss, Kathy·1985·Social Problems

Abstract

This paper identifies and analyzes three constructs basic to the study of gender relations–boundaries, negotiation and domination, and consciousness. The concept of boundaries describes the complex structures–physical, social, ideological, and psychological–which establish differences and commonalities between women arid men, among women, and among men. The reciprocal processes of negotiation and domination elucidate the ways in which women and men act to support and/or challenge the existing system of gender relations. While domination describes systems of control and coercion, negotiation addresses the ways women and men bargain for privileges and resources. Consciousness assumes various forms ranging from gender awareness to feminist/anti-feminist consciousness, and is conceived as a process which develops dialectically in the social relations of the sexes. We argue that this conceptual framework produces a more sensitive and complex set of analytical tools for understanding gender relations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1525/sp.1985.32.4.03a00020

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 334

Metadata

Authors
Gerson, J. M., & Peiss, K.
Venue
Social Problems
Published
1985-04
Volume
32
Issue
4
Pages
317-331
ISSN
  • 0037-7791 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-8533
OpenAlex
W2000754657
Cited by
334
References
2
FWCI
8.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.