Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science¶
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.
Cited by¶
4 citations across 4 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Overton Window
- In scientific publishing, it is the range of hypotheses publishable as serious empirical work in a field at a given time, with positions outside — parapsychology, certain heterodox economic claims — routed to fringe venues.
This sourceBoundary-work whereby a scientific community marks off serious/respectable claims from 'pseudoscience' and fringe, with the boundary historically contingent and redrawn over time.
- In scientific publishing, it is the range of hypotheses publishable as serious empirical work in a field at a given time, with positions outside — parapsychology, certain heterodox economic claims — routed to fringe venues.
- Phase Separation
- The transfer runs both ways: the interface-as-active-region idea, developed first in materials science, feeds back into sociology as "boundary work," the active investment required to maintain social-category interfaces.
This sourceIntroduces 'boundary work' — the active maintenance of social-category interfaces.
- The transfer runs both ways: the interface-as-active-region idea, developed first in materials science, feeds back into sociology as "boundary work," the active investment required to maintain social-category interfaces.
- Segmentation and Boundary Drawing
- It compresses diverse categorization challenges into a single structural question: Where should boundaries be drawn, and what principles guide that choice—a question Gieryn (1983) makes vivid in his analysis of how scientists actively perform "boundary-work" to demarcate science from non-science in service of professional and intellectual interests?
This sourceIntroduces "boundary-work" — the active rhetorical placement of boundaries between science and non-science by scientists pursuing professional authority and autonomy.
- It compresses diverse categorization challenges into a single structural question: Where should boundaries be drawn, and what principles guide that choice—a question Gieryn (1983) makes vivid in his analysis of how scientists actively perform "boundary-work" to demarcate science from non-science in service of professional and intellectual interests?
Mechanisms¶
- Public Reclassification Note
- Its strength is that it supplies the legitimacy layer a reclassification needs to be received as reasoned rather than arbitrary — it does the boundary-work
This sourceDescribes boundary-work as publicly constructing a favorable demarcation that protects an institution’s legitimacy and intellectual authority.
- Its strength is that it supplies the legitimacy layer a reclassification needs to be received as reasoned rather than arbitrary — it does the boundary-work
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 4 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:f8265e3edd59 · see in the full table