Intersectionality Theory and Practice

Author(s):  
Doyin Atewologun

Intersectionality is a critical framework that provides us with the mindset and language for examining interconnections and interdependencies between social categories and systems. Intersectionality is relevant for researchers and for practitioners because it enhances analytical sophistication and offers theoretical explanations of the ways in which heterogeneous members of specific groups (such as women) might experience the workplace differently depending on their ethnicity, sexual orientation, and/or class and other social locations. Sensitivity to such differences enhances insight into issues of social justice and inequality in organizations and other institutions, thus maximizing the chance of social change. The concept of intersectional locations emerged from the racialized experiences of minority ethnic women in the United States. Intersectional thinking has gained increased prominence in business and management studies, particularly in critical organization studies. A predominant focus in this field is on individual subjectivities at intersectional locations (such as examining the occupational identities of minority ethnic women). This emphasis on individuals’ experiences and within-group differences has been described variously as “content specialization” or an “intracategorical approach.” An alternate focus in business and management studies is on highlighting systematic dynamics of power. This encompasses a focus on “systemic intersectionality” and an “intercategorical approach.” Here, scholars examine multiple between-group differences, charting shifting configurations of inequality along various dimensions. As a critical theory, intersectionality conceptualizes knowledge as situated, contextual, relational, and reflective of political and economic power. Intersectionality tends to be associated with qualitative research methods due to the central role of giving voice, elicited through focus groups, narrative interviews, action research, and observations. Intersectionality is also utilized as a methodological tool for conducting qualitative research, such as by researchers adopting an intersectional reflexivity mindset. Intersectionality is also increasingly associated with quantitative and statistical methods, which contribute to intersectionality by helping us understand and interpret the individual, combined (additive or multiplicative) effects of various categories (privileged and disadvantaged) in a given context. Future considerations for intersectionality theory and practice include managing its broad applicability while attending to its sociopolitical and emancipatory aims, and theoretically advancing understanding of the simultaneous forces of privilege and penalty in the workplace.

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 145-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fiona Brookman ◽  
Edward R. Maguire ◽  
Mike Maguire

A growing body of research examines factors that influence the likelihood of solving homicide cases. Much of this research emanates from North America and is based on quantitative analysis of police data. This article explores the views of homicide detectives, complemented by observations of investigations, in both Great Britain and the United States, regarding factors that affect the chances of solving homicides. Although we find some important differences between nations, the qualitative evidence suggests that the likelihood of solving even the most challenging homicide cases in both nations can be influenced by police agency at the individual and strategic level.


Prospects ◽  
1982 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 53-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guenter H. Lenz

Since its beginning, the American Studies community has been remarkably uneasy about the role and meaning theoretical thinking about its premises and objectives should have in its work. Even more than the individual disciplines in the humanities and the social sciences, the American Studies movement has again and again felt compelled to justify its existence and its aims, to develop a “method” or “philosophy” for its pursuits. But these attempts at theory more often than not have resulted in a glorification of practical or substantive work, or in an identification of its rationale with a few books by its major scholars. In the most recent time of “crisis,” the traditional opposition of “theory” to “practice” seems to have been confirmed, in one way or another, not only on a national scale but in its international perspective. In a recent interview, Henry Nash Smith, using two articles by young German scholars as a starting point, endorsed the old view that “practice is much more important” in America and that, “almost by instinct, in this country we are less, far less theoretical than the Germans.” It should be mentioned that, ironically, contributions to a theoretical definition of American Studies became far more numerous in the United States just when the younger German scholars began to turn from theoretical debates to substantive work, which shows that Smith's “instinctual” distinction actually prevents us from realizing the fundamental historical differences in the development and the significance of the interaction of theory and practice in the two countries.


Author(s):  
Diane Watt

Learning how to conduct qualitative research may seem daunting for those new to the task, especially given the paradigm ’s emphasis on complexity and emergent design. Although there are guidelines in the literature, each project is unique and ultimately the individual researcher must determine how best to proceed . Reflexivity is thus considered essential, potentially facilitating understanding of both the phenomenon under study and the research process itself . Drawing upon the contents of a reflective journal, the author provides an inside view of a first project, making connections between theory and practice. This personal narrative highlights the value of reflexivity both during and after a study, and may help to demystify the research process for those new to the field.


Author(s):  
Osagie K. Obasogie

The next chapter continues the work of thinking from the level of individuals to the conditions of racial reconciliation. It argues that many of the racial antagonisms that existed in the United States from slavery up through the end of World War II were based largely upon a singular idea: biological race, or the notion that social categories of race reflect inherent group differences. Osagie K. Obasogie argues that the continued skepticism toward, and resistance to, social constructionist understandings of race in scientific and medical research serves as a primary barrier to racial reconciliation. Until science and medicine move away from the idea that human difference, disease patterns, and disparate social and health outcomes lay in molecular or other physiological distinctions and take seriously the ideological origins and import of race, no meaningful racial healing can take place.


2005 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 108-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette Park ◽  
Charles M. Judd

For the past 40 years, social psychological research on stereotyping and prejudice in the United States has been dominated by the social cognition perspective, which has emphasized the important role of basic categorization processes in intergroup dynamics. An inadvertent consequence of this approach has been a disproportionate focus on social categorization as a causal factor in intergroup animosity and, accordingly, an emphasis on approaches that minimize category distinctions as the solution to intergroup conflict. Though recognizing the crucial function of categorization, we question existing support for the hypothesis that the perception of strong group differences necessarily results in greater intergroup bias. Given that it is neither feasible nor ultimately desirable to imagine that social categories can be eliminated, we suggest that a more useful approach is one that promotes intergroup harmony even while recognizing and valuing the distinctions that define our social world.


2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Scheibelhofer

This paper focuses on gendered mobilities of highly skilled researchers working abroad. It is based on an empirical qualitative study that explored the mobility aspirations of Austrian scientists who were working in the United States at the time they were interviewed. Supported by a case study, the paper demonstrates how a qualitative research strategy including graphic drawings sketched by the interviewed persons can help us gain a better understanding of the gendered importance of social relations for the future mobility aspirations of scientists working abroad.


2015 ◽  
Vol 36-37 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-183
Author(s):  
Paul Taylor

John Rae, a Scottish antiquarian collector and spirit merchant, played a highly prominent role in the local natural history societies and exhibitions of nineteenth-century Aberdeen. While he modestly described his collection of archaeological lithics and other artefacts, principally drawn from Aberdeenshire but including some items from as far afield as the United States, as a mere ‘routh o’ auld nick-nackets' (abundance of old knick-knacks), a contemporary singled it out as ‘the best known in private hands' (Daily Free Press 4/5/91). After Rae's death, Glasgow Museums, National Museums Scotland, the University of Aberdeen Museum and the Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford, as well as numerous individual private collectors, purchased items from the collection. Making use of historical and archive materials to explore the individual biography of Rae and his collection, this article examines how Rae's collecting and other antiquarian activities represent and mirror wider developments in both the ‘amateur’ antiquarianism carried out by Rae and his fellow collectors for reasons of self-improvement and moral education, and the ‘professional’ antiquarianism of the museums which purchased his artefacts. Considered in its wider nineteenth-century context, this is a representative case study of the early development of archaeology in the wider intellectual, scientific and social context of the era.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maksim Rudnev

A theory of basic human values relies on the similarity of value structures across countries. It has been well established that the quasi-circumplex value structure as a whole is indeed universal. However, less attention has been paid to the associations between specific values. This study investigated associations between four higher-order values across age, education, and income groups. We analyzed the data from national representative samples collected in 29 countries as part of the fourth round of the European Social Survey with a series of multilevel regressions. Younger age, higher levels of education and income coincided with higher independence of the four adjacent higher-order values, whereas among older, less educated, and less wealthy groups, values tended to merge into a single dimension of Social versus Person Focus. These differences were slightly weaker in more economically developed countries. The group differences in value associations may follow from corresponding differences in the degree of societal and individual empowerment, cognitive abilities, and socialization experiences. Accounting for the individual differences in relations between values may bring deeper understanding and higher predictive power to the studies of links between values and various behaviors or attitudes. , value structure, value interactions, European Social Survey


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document