ScholarGate
Assistente
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.

Apri in MethodMindIn arrivoApplica, confronta, ottieni indicazioni
Strumenti e risorse
Scarica le diapositive
Impara ed esplora
VideoIn arrivo

Leggi il metodo completo

Riservato ai membri

Accedi con un account gratuito per leggere questa sezione.

Accedi

Mappa dei metodi

Il vicinato dei metodi correlati — seleziona un nodo per esplorare.

Fonti

  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

Come citare questa pagina

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

Quale metodo?

Affianca questo metodo ai suoi parenti più prossimi e leggili fianco a fianco — la biblioteca dispone i libri sul tavolo; la scelta è tua.

Confronta affiancati

Citato da

ScholarGateBoundary-Work Analysis (Boundary-Work Analysis (Demarcation of Science)). Consultato il 2026-06-24 da https://scholargate.app/it/science-technology-studies/boundary-work-analysis · Insieme di dati: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026