Gender and Technology: A Bibliometric Analysis of Feminist Techno-Sociology Scholarship (2000–2024)

Elsa Fitriani; Rosidin Rosidin; Fransiskus Novrianto Pakpahan; Rifai Rifai

doi:10.59535/09m6m161

Authors

Elsa Fitriani Department of Sociology, Universitas Muhammadiyah Bengkulu, Indonesia Author
Rosidin Rosidin Department of Sociology, Universitas Muhammadiyah Bengkulu, Indonesia Author
Fransiskus Novrianto Pakpahan Department of Management, Universitas Muhammadiyah Bengkulu, Indonesia Author
Rifai Rifai Department of Sociology, Universitas Muhammadiyah Bengkulu, Indonesia Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59535/09m6m161

Keywords:

Gender, Technology, Bibliometrics, Inclusion, Inequality

Abstract

Feminist techno-sociology critically examines the intersection of gender and technology, addressing how technological advancements both reinforce and challenge gendered power structures in labor, identity, and social relations; however, a systematic bibliometric analysis of this field remains scarce, creating a gap in understanding its intellectual evolution and global impact. This study fills that gap by employing bibliometric methods (co-citation and bibliographic coupling) to analyze 969 Scopus and Web of Science documents (2000–2024) from the UK, US, Brazil, Canada, and Indonesia, using VOSviewer to map citation networks and thematic trends. Key findings reveal four dominant research clusters: (1) sociology of knowledge and reflexivity, (2) social relations in professional roles, (3) Bourdieusian social reproduction, and (4) risk society and identity, with post-2010 scholarship emphasizing algorithmic bias, digital feminism (#MeToo), and inclusive tech design. The study underscores the urgency of interdisciplinary, gender-inclusive approaches in technology development while highlighting limitations such as Western-centric biases and overreliance on quantitative metrics. Future research should integrate postcolonial perspectives and qualitative methods to better address systemic inequalities, offering policymakers and scholars a foundation for equitable technological advancement.

References

[1] J. Wajcman, “Feminist theories of technology,” Camb. J. Econ., vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 143–152, Jan. 2010, doi: 10.1093/cje/ben057.

[2] O. A. Oyeleye, “Feminist Postproverbial as a Panacea for Decolonising African Feminist Scholarship,” J. High. Educ. Afr. Rev. Enseign. Suprieur En Afr., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 85–106, 2022, Accessed: Jul. 09, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.jstor.org/stable/48678878

[3] K. Farhall and L. Rickards, “The ‘Gender Agenda’ in Agriculture for Development and Its (Lack of) Alignment With Feminist Scholarship,” Front. Sustain. Food Syst., vol. 5, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2021.573424.

[4] K. Aggestam, A. B. Rosamond, and E. Hedling, “Feminist digital diplomacy and foreign policy change in Sweden,” Place Brand. Public Dipl., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 314–324, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1057/s41254-021-00225-3.

[5] A. Y. Peng, “A techno-feminist analysis of beauty app development in China’s high-tech industry,” J. Gend. Stud., Jul. 2021, Accessed: Jul. 09, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09589236.2021.1929091

[6] C. Schurr, N. Marquardt, and E. Militz, “Intimate technologies: Towards a feminist perspective on geographies of technoscience,” Prog. Hum. Geogr., vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 215–237, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1177/03091325231151673.

[7] J. Wajcman, “Reflections on Gender and Technology Studies:: In What State is the Art?,” Soc. Stud. Sci., vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 447–464, Jun. 2000, doi: 10.1177/030631200030003005.

[8] J. Hearn and L. Husu, “Understanding Gender: Some Implications for Science and Technology,” Interdiscip. Sci. Rev., vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 103–113, Jun. 2011, doi: 10.1179/030801811X13013181961301.

[9] F. Bray, “Gender and Technology,” Annu. Rev. Anthropol., vol. 36, no. Volume 36, 2007, pp. 37–53, Oct. 2007, doi: 10.1146/annurev.anthro.36.081406.094328.

[10] A. M. Barbala, “Reassembling #MeToo: Tracing the techno-affective agency of the feminist Instagram influencer,” Convergence, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 992–1007, Jun. 2024, doi: 10.1177/13548565231191261.

[11] M. Jack and S. Avle, “A Feminist Geopolitics of Technology,” Glob. Perspect., vol. 2, no. 1, p. 24398, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1525/gp.2021.24398.

[12] H. Marčetić, “Sociotechnical Imaginaries of Data Feminism : How Scholars with Feminist Approaches Interpret the Datafied Present and Envision Futurities,” 2024, Accessed: Jul. 09, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-31760

[13] N. van Eck and L. Waltman, “Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping,” Dec. 2009, doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.

[14] H. Small, “Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents,” J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 265–269, 1973, doi: 10.1002/asi.4630240406.

[15] M. M. Kessler, “Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers,” Am. Doc., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 10–25, 1963, doi: 10.1002/asi.5090140103.

[16] I. Zupic and T. Čater, “Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization,” Organ. Res. Methods, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 429–472, Jul. 2015, doi: 10.1177/1094428114562629.

[17] W. Faulkner, “The technology question in feminism: A view from feminist technology studies,” Womens Stud. Int. Forum, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 79–95, Jan. 2001, doi: 10.1016/S0277-5395(00)00166-7.

[18] T. Bolukbasi, K.-W. Chang, J. Zou, V. Saligrama, and A. Kalai, “Quantifying and Reducing Stereotypes in Word Embeddings,” Jun. 20, 2016, arXiv: arXiv:1606.06121. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1606.06121.

[19] C. C. Perez, Invisible Women: the Sunday Times number one bestseller exposing the gender bias women face every day. Random House, 2019.

[20] C. Brayton, “In Defense of Parity, Females, and Pathology in Research,” Vet. Pathol., vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 731–733, Sep. 2017, doi: 10.1177/0300985817717772.

[21] K. Bloor, “‘Feminist Analysis of Science and the Implications for Higher Education,’” Sociol. Res. Online, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 45–54, May 2000, doi: 10.5153/sro.453.

[22] V. Mottier, “Masculine domination: Gender and power in Bourdieu’s writings,” Fem. Theory, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 345–359, Dec. 2002, doi: 10.1177/146470002762492042.

[23] A. Abbott, “The Problem of Excess,” Sociol. Theory, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 1–26, Mar. 2014, doi: 10.1177/0735275114523419.

[24] J. C. Alexander, The Civil Sphere. Oxford University Press, USA, 2006.

[25] M. Emirbayer, “Manifesto for a Relational Sociology,” Am. J. Sociol., vol. 103, no. 2, pp. 281–317, Sep. 1997, doi: 10.1086/231209.

[26] D. Muzio, D. M. Brock, and R. Suddaby, “Professions and Institutional Change: Towards an Institutionalist Sociology of the Professions,” J. Manag. Stud., vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 699–721, 2013, doi: 10.1111/joms.12030.

[27] E. F. Calhoun, “Action research for school improvement,” Educ. Leadersh., vol. 59, no. 6, pp. 18–24, 2002.

[28] G. K. Bhambra, “Introduction: Knowledge production in global context: Power and coloniality,” Curr. Sociol., vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 451–456, Jul. 2014, doi: 10.1177/0011392114524504.

[29] D. Bloor, Knowledge and Social Imagery. University of Chicago Press, 1991.

[30] P. Bourdieu and L. J. D. Wacquant, An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. University of Chicago Press, 1992.

[31] A. Abbott, The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor. University of Chicago Press, 2014.

[32] P. Bourdieu, “A social critique of the judgement of taste,” Camb. MA, 1984.

[33] P. Bourdieu, “Program for a sociology of sport.,” Sociol. Sport J., vol. 5, no. 2, 1988.

[34] C. Jenks, Culture: Critical Concepts in Sociology. Taylor & Francis, 2003.

[35] F. W. Castro, “Andrew Abbott: Chaos of Disciplines,” Acta Sociol., vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 277–279, Sep. 2001, doi: 10.1177/000169930104400307.

[36] C. T. Beck, “Postpartum Depression: A Metasynthesis,” Qual. Health Res., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 453–472, Apr. 2002, doi: 10.1177/104973202129120016.

[37] T. Giddens, “‘Distinguished Irishwomen in London’: The Promotion of Professional Networks in Charlotte O’Conor Eccles’ Journalism and Fiction,” Engl. Stud., vol. 104, no. 6, pp. 887–909, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.1080/0013838X.2023.2239389.

[38] E. B. Silva, “Habitus: beyond Sociology,” Sociol. Rev., vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 73–92, Feb. 2016, doi: 10.1111/1467-954X.12345.

[39] N. Beck, “The methodology of cointegration,” Polit. Anal., vol. 4, pp. 237–247, 1992.

[40] A. Giddens, “Modernity and Self-Identity,” in Social Theory Re-Wired, 3rd ed., Routledge, 2023.

[41] N. Gale, “The Sociology of Traditional, Complementary and Alternative Medicine,” Sociol. Compass, vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 805–822, 2014, doi: 10.1111/soc4.12182.

[42] O. Lizardo et al., “What Are Dual Process Models? Implications for Cultural Analysis in Sociology,” Sociol. Theory, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 287–310, Dec. 2016, doi: 10.1177/0735275116675900.

[43] D. MacKenzie, “The Credit Crisis as a Problem in the Sociology of Knowledge,” Am. J. Sociol., vol. 116, no. 6, pp. 1778–1841, May 2011, doi: 10.1086/659639.

[44] P. Bourdieu, The Logic of Practice. Stanford University Press, 1990.

[45] K. K. Cetina, Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Harvard University Press, 1999.

[46] G. Eyal, “For a Sociology of Expertise: The Social Origins of the Autism Epidemic,” Am. J. Sociol., vol. 118, no. 4, pp. 863–907, Jan. 2013, doi: 10.1086/668448.

[47] D. Calnitsky, “Economic Sociology as Disequilibrium Economics: A Contribution to the Critique of the New Economic Sociology,” Sociol. Rev., vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 565–592, Aug. 2014, doi: 10.1111/1467-954X.12179.

[48] B. Lingard, “Socially just pedagogies in changing times,” Int. Stud. Sociol. Educ., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 165–186, Jul. 2005, doi: 10.1080/09620210500200138.

[49] B. de S. Santos, “Postcolonialism, Decoloniality, and Epistemologies of the South,” in Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Literature, 2021. Accessed: Jul. 09, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://oxfordre.com/literature/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190201098.001.0001/acrefore-9780190201098-e-1262

[50] M. Neumann, An Interpretive Account to Agent-based Social Simulation: Using Criminology to Explore Cultural Possibilities. Taylor & Francis, 2023.

[51] J. Mylan, “Understanding the diffusion of Sustainable Product-Service Systems: Insights from the sociology of consumption and practice theory,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 97, pp. 13–20, Jun. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.065.

[52] J. W. Creswell and J. D. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. SAGE Publications, 2017.

[53] B. Jessop and S. Oosterlynck, “Cultural political economy: On making the cultural turn without falling into soft economic sociology,” Geoforum, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 1155–1169, May 2008, doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2006.12.008.

[54] B. Lingard, S. Rawolle, and S. Taylor 1, “Globalizing policy sociology in education: working with Bourdieu,” J. Educ. Policy, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 759–777, Jan. 2005, doi: 10.1080/02680930500238945.

[55] S. Moss and B. Edmonds, “Sociology and Simulation: Statistical and Qualitative Cross‐Validation,” Am. J. Sociol., vol. 110, no. 4, pp. 1095–1131, Jan. 2005, doi: 10.1086/427320.