IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/femeco/v9y2003i1p1-18.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gendered Social Indicators and Grounded Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Siobhan Austen
  • Therese Jefferson
  • Vicki Thein

Abstract

This article outlines a pilot program undertaken to assess the advantages and disadvantages of including significant elements of grounded theory in research measuring women's progress. This pilot program, carried out in Western Australia, aimed at broadening the range of data collection and analysis methods in the field of gendered social and economic indicators. It featured ten affinity group discussions with sixty-two women and six men on the issue of women's progress in the region. The results have implications for future research on women's well-being.

Suggested Citation

  • Siobhan Austen & Therese Jefferson & Vicki Thein, 2003. "Gendered Social Indicators and Grounded Theory," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 1-18.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:femeco:v:9:y:2003:i:1:p:1-18
    DOI: 10.1080/1354570032000063065
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1354570032000063065
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/1354570032000063065?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christine Mayrhuber & Michaela Neumayr & Margit Schratzenstaller-Altzinger & Birgit Buchinger & Ulrike Gschwandtner, 2006. "Gender-Budget-Analyse für Oberösterreich," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 27105.
    2. Elizabeth Stanton, 2007. "Engendering Human Development: A Critique of the UNDP’s Gender-Related Development Index," Working Papers wp131, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

    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:taf:femeco:v:9:y:2003:i:1:p:1-18. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RFEC20 .

    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.