IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v571y2000i1p121-134.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The State of Gender Studies in Political Science

Author

Listed:
  • Gretchen Ritter

    (University of Texas at Austin)

  • Nicole Mellow

    (Department of Government at the University of Texas)

Abstract

What effect has the study of gender had on political science? Compared to other branches of the social sciences, political science has been among the most resistant to feminist analysis. Political science scholarship generally is divided into four main subfields: political theory, American politics, comparative politics, and international relations. There are great disparities between these areas in the types and amount of gender scholarship that has been done. While feminist theory has become an accepted part of political theory, it has had a more limited impact in the other areas. Furthermore, where gender scholarship has appeared, it is often guided by intellectually conservative epistemological and methodological assumptions. Focusing on current major themes and significant works in the discipline, this article explores the differences in gender scholarship between subfields.

Suggested Citation

  • Gretchen Ritter & Nicole Mellow, 2000. "The State of Gender Studies in Political Science," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 571(1), pages 121-134, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:571:y:2000:i:1:p:121-134
    DOI: 10.1177/000271620057100109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/000271620057100109
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/000271620057100109?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kathlene, Lyn, 1994. "Power and Influence in State Legislative Policymaking: The Interaction of Gender and Position in Committee Hearing Debates," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(3), pages 560-576, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. O’Brien, Diana Z. & Rickne, Johanna, 2016. "Gender Quotas and Women's Political Leadership," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 110(1), pages 112-126, February.
    2. Baskaran, Thushyanthan & Hessami, Zohal, 2022. "The gender recontest gap in elections," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    3. Joni Lovenduski & Pippa Norris, 2003. "Westminster Women: the Politics of Presence," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(1), pages 84-102, March.
    4. Diego Werneck Arguelhes & Juliana Cesario Alvim & Rafaela Nogueira & Henrique Wang, 2024. "“They don't let us speak”: Gender, collegiality, and interruptions in deliberations in the Brazilian Supreme Court," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 174-207, March.
    5. Folke, Olle & Rickne, Johanna, 2012. "Female representation but male rule? Party competition and the political glass ceiling," Working Paper Series, Center for Labor Studies 2012:9, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    6. Lívia Markóczy & Sunny Li Sun & Jigao Zhu, 2021. "The Glass Pyramid: Informal Gender Status Hierarchy on Boards," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 168(4), pages 827-845, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:571:y:2000:i:1:p:121-134. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.