Can gender studies be studied?: Reply to comments on Soderlund and Madison
2016 (English)In: The Scientist (Philadelphia, Pa.), ISSN 0138-9130, E-ISSN 1588-2861, Vol. 108, no 1, 329-335 p.Article in journal (Refereed) PublishedText
We reply to the comment by Lundgren, Shildrick and Lawrence on our article on gender studies bibliometrics and argue that it does not challenge any of our main results. Their points of criticism concerned that we had not compiled exactly all scholarly gender production, that the gender studies field had changed during the period, that the definition of the research area is vague, and suggest that only gender studies scholars themselves are able to study the field. We maintain that constructive scientific critique should specify alternative methods and how they are expected to change the results and conclusions, and why that would be preferable. Without such stringency, it reduces to regressive lists of detail.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 108, no 1, 329-335 p.
Bibliometric analysis, Gender studies, Citations, Impact factor
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-124228DOI: 10.1007/s11192-016-1963-9ISI: 000378777500017OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-124228DiVA: diva2:950555