The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Conceptual Practices of Power: A Feminist Sociology of Knowledge.
Abstract
Sociologists generate idology instead of knowledge - particularly where women are concerned. By starting with the theoretical formulations of their discipline and then interpreting people's activities as expressions of those ideas, sociologists both participate in and perpetuate society's traditional power relations.So argues Dorothy E. Smith in this provocative study of her own discipline and its relationship to women's lives.While acknowledging that social science is ideological, Smith argues that for sociologists idology affects methods of inquiry and transforms what actually happens in people's lives into a formalized picture that lacks subjectiveness. She explicates the need for an alternative sociology that better explores everyday experience, suggesting a Marxist materialist ideology, and emphasizing that ideology is not content but practice.Smith is especially concerned with the application of sociological ideology to the human service bureaucracy and the way institutions of mental health reconstruct women's lives. She provides meticulous accounts of the ways in with police reports, governments statistics, hospital records, and psychiatric files and ideologically interpreted, transforming a person's life history in the process. In a reveatory chapter on biographer Quentin Bell's exploration of Virginia Woolf's suicide, Smith demonstrates once again how the professional who claims to report an event acurrately also shapes it.Highly critical of current sociological practice, she also hopes that alternative appraoches will change the discipline.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Espeland, W. N., & Stevens, M. L. (2008) · European Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1017/s0003975609000150 · Cited by 1,265
Nakata, M. (2007) · The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education · doi:10.1017/s1326011100004646 · Cited by 759
Nast, H. J. (1994) · The Professional Geographer · doi:10.1111/j.0033-0124.1994.00054.x · Cited by 488
Here and Everywhere: Sociology of Scientific Knowledge
Shapin, S. (1995) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.so.21.080195.001445 · Cited by 482
Psychotherapy in Everyday Life
Dreier, O. (2001) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511619519 · Cited by 393
Metadata
- Authors
- McCarthy, E. D., & Smith, D. E.
- Venue
- Contemporary Sociology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1992-01
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 131
- ISSN
- 0094-3061 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2129752508
- Cited by
- 1,008
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 116.86
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Conceptual Practices of Power: A Feminist Sociology of Knowledge. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2074807
- The paper
- McCarthy, E. D., & Smith, D. E. (1992). The Conceptual Practices of Power: A Feminist Sociology of Knowledge. Contemporary Sociology. https://doi.org/10.2307/2074807
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.