ScholarGate
Asistents
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.

Atvērt MethodMindDrīzumāLietojiet, salīdziniet, saņemiet norādījumus
Rīki un resursi
Lejupielādēt slaidus
Mācieties un izpētiet
VideoDrīzumā

Lasīt pilno metodes aprakstu

Tikai dalībniekiem

Piesakieties ar bezmaksas kontu, lai lasītu šo sadaļu.

Pieteikties

Metožu karte

Saistīto metožu apkaime — atlasiet mezglu, lai izpētītu.

Avoti

  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

Kā citēt šo lapu

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

Kura metode?

Novietojiet šo metodi blakus tās tuvākajām radniecīgajām metodēm un lasiet tās līdzās — bibliotēka noliek grāmatas uz galda; izvēle ir jūsu.

Salīdzināt blakus

Uz to atsaucas

ScholarGateBoundary-Work Analysis (Boundary-Work Analysis (Demarcation of Science)). Izgūts 2026-06-24 no https://scholargate.app/lv/science-technology-studies/boundary-work-analysis · Datu kopa: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026