Methods for Intervention

By focusing on gender analysis and feminist design of Information and Communication Technology (ICT), this special section brings together three strands of expertise: Science and Technology Studies (STS), Gender Studies and computing. 1 A commonality among these three disciplines is a shared interest in interventions to improve the world we live in. Nevertheless, particularly Gender Studies and computing seem difficult to combine, partly because of their different epistemologies. Whereas deconstructivism, the challenging of categories and dichotomies, is an important target of many Gender Studies (and STS) researchers, most ICT researchers have a positivist stance toward science (Forsythe 2001; Weber 2004) as ICT developers need clear categories and choices to construct ICTs (Maass et al. 2007, 23). The presentations at the "Gender & ICT Symposium 2009" in Bremen, Germany, from which the articles of this special section originate, showed that STS provides theoretical concepts, tools, and theories that may help bridge this gap.

[1]  Steve Woolgar,et al.  Knowledge and reflexivity: New frontiers in the sociology of knowledge. , 1991 .

[2]  Els Rommes.  Gender Senititve Design Practices , 2006 .

[3]  Els Rommes.  Gender sensitive design practices , 2006 .

[4]  J. Wajcman.  Reflections on Gender and Technology Studies: , 2000 .

[5]  G. Corea.  Man-made women: How new reproductive technologies affect women , 1985 .

[6]  Lucy Suchman.  Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication , 1987 .

[7]  S. Haslanger.  Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex” , 1998 .

[8]  J. Jacko,et al.  The human-computer interaction handbook: fundamentals, evolving technologies and emerging applications , 2002 .

[9]  M. Berg.  The Politics of Technology: On Bringing Social Theory into Technological Design , 1998 .

[10]  L. Suchman.  Plans and situated actions , 1987 .

[11]  Cary Nelson,et al.  Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture , 1990 .

[12]  Diana E. Forsythe,et al.  Studying Those Who Study Us: An Anthropologist in the World of Artificial Intelligence , 2002 .

[13]  J. Krige.  How Users Matter: The Co-Construction of Users and Technology , 2006 .

[14]  Teun Zuiderent-Jerak,et al.  Editorial Introduction: Unpacking ‘Intervention’ in Science and Technology Studies , 2007 .

[15]  Austin Henderson,et al.  Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction , 2002, UBIQ.

[16]  Franziska Dübgen.  Can the Subaltern Speak at the WSF , 2013 .

[17]  D. Haraway.  Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature , 1990 .

[18]  E. Coiera.  Interaction Design , 2002 .

[19]  Mieke Verloo,et al.  Multiple Inequalities, Intersectionality and the European Union , 2006 .

[20]  P. Greenaway.  Making the change. , 2001, The Journal of audiovisual media in medicine.

[21]  Christina Björkman,et al.  Crossing Boundaries, Focusing Foundations, Trying Translations : Feminist Technoscience Strategies in Computer Science , 2005 .

[22]  Rosalind Gill,et al.  The Gender-Technology Relation , 2018 .

[23]  C. Jensen.  Sorting Attachments: Usefulness of STS in Healthcare Practice and Policy , 2007 .

[24]  Els Rommes,et al.  Gender research and IT construction: Concepts for a challenging partnership , 2007 .

[25]  Robin Williams,et al.  The Wrong Trousers? Beyond the Design Fallacy: Social Learning and the User , 2005 .

[26]  Malcolm Ashmore,et al.  The Reflexive Thesis: Wrighting Sociology of Scientific Knowledge , 1989 .

[27]  Lucas D. Introna,et al.  Invoking politics and ethics in the design of information technology: undesigning the design , 2007, Ethics and Information Technology.

[28]  T.L.J. Ferris,et al.  Participatory IT Design: Designing for Business and Workplace Realities , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication.

[29]  Pernille Bjørn,et al.  Dissenting in reflective conversations: Critical components of doing action research , 2011 .

[30]  T. Zuiderent-Jerak.  Preventing Implementation: Exploring Interventions with Standardization in Healthcare , 2007 .

[31]  Horst Oberquelle,et al.  HCI in Germany , 1999, SGCH.

[32]  R. Weber.  Editor's comments: the rhetoric of positivism versus interpretivism: a personal view , 2004 .

[33]  Donald MacKenzie,et al.  The social shaping of technology : how the refrigerator got its hum , 1985 .

[34]  J. Wajcman.  FROM WOMEN AND TECHNOLOGY TO GENDERED TECHNOSCIENCE , 2007 .

[35]  M. Kyng,et al.  Computers and Democracy: A Scandinavian Challenge , 1987 .

[36]  J. R. Ravets,et al.  Post-Normal Science , 2006 .

[37]  A. Rip,et al.  The past and future of constructive technology assessment , 1997 .

[38]  W. Faulkner.  The Power and the Pleasure? A Research Agenda for “Making Gender Stick” to Engineers , 2000 .

[39]  Heidi Schelhowe,et al.  Gender designs IT: construction and deconstruction of information society technology , 2007 .

[40]  E. Hanappi-Egger.  Computer Games: Playing Gender, Reflecting on Gender , 2007 .

[41]  H. Corneliussen.  Technologies of inclusion. Gender in the Information Society , 2014 .