ScholarGate
Avustaja
Process / pipelineSociology of scientific knowledge

Boundary-Work Analysis

Boundary-work analysis studies how the line between science and non-science is drawn, defended, and contested—not by philosophers laying down timeless criteria, but by actors doing rhetorical work to secure authority, resources, and credibility. Introduced by Thomas Gieryn in 1983 and elaborated in his 1999 book Cultural Boundaries of Science, the approach treats demarcation as a practical, strategic, and historically variable accomplishment. The method examines the discourse of demarcation episodes to reveal the strategies—expansion, expulsion, and protection of autonomy—through which the cultural map of science is redrawn whenever its credibility is on the line.

Avaa sovelluksessa MethodMindTulossaSovella, vertaa, saa ohjeita
Työkalut ja resurssit
Lataa diat
Opi ja tutki
VideoTulossa

Lue koko menetelmä

Vain jäsenille

Kirjaudu sisään maksuttomalla tilillä lukeaksesi tämän osion.

Kirjaudu sisään

Menetelmäkartta

Lähimenetelmien naapurusto — valitse solmu tutkiaksesi.

Lähteet

  1. Gieryn, T. F. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48(6), 781-795. DOI: 10.2307/2095325
  2. Gieryn, T. F. (1999). Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line. University of Chicago Press. ISBN: 9780226292625

Näin viittaat tähän sivuun

ScholarGate. (2026, June 22). Boundary-Work Analysis (Demarcation of Science). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/fi/science-technology-studies/boundary-work-analysis

Mikä menetelmä?

Aseta tämä menetelmä lähimpien sukulaistensa rinnalle ja lue niitä yhdessä — kirjasto asettaa teokset pöydälle; valinta on sinun.

Vertaa rinnakkain

Tähän viittaavat

ScholarGateBoundary-Work Analysis (Boundary-Work Analysis (Demarcation of Science)). Haettu 2026-06-24 osoitteesta https://scholargate.app/fi/science-technology-studies/boundary-work-analysis · Aineisto: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026