
Sociology’s Sacred Victims and the Politics of Knowledge - the_grue
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12108-018-9381-5
======
the_grue
The article is behind the paywall, but it can be accessed through Sci-Hub.
Some of the most interesting findings:

\- 43% respondents did not agree with "Advocacy and research should be kept as
separate as possible to protect the objectivity of the research".

\- 45% respondents did not agree with "It is plausible that women's greater
representation than men in people-oriented professions (social work, nursing,
etc.) is due in part to a biological component".

\- 31% respondents did agree with "It is not plausible to conclude that gender
discrimination in the workplace has disappeared until men and women are (at
least roughly) equally represented in virtually all occupational categories."

~~~
nkurz
I think this is a legal link to the full paper:
[https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s12108-018-9381-5?aut...](https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s12108-018-9381-5?author_access_token=Nc65w2hx4-Zjk6NAzj5Xu_e4RwlQNchNByi7wbcMAY4kB3fxvSl6pHDczg5fmW9WiPMtc-
iQ6cdD_ErnMneOot7UGUEKhtU8x_XpSuOyISTmQUM8xqa9xYHEfspzK29YplwJNtI8qa-
khKCk_o_YXg%3D%3D)

~~~
the_grue
Hmm, your link has an author_access_token in it. Are you sure it's not linked
to your or someone else's (author's?) account?

~~~
nkurz
I'm unsure. I found it linked from an earlier discussion
([https://www.annieduke.com/amazon-prime-day-cash-crash-
annies...](https://www.annieduke.com/amazon-prime-day-cash-crash-annies-
newsletter-august-6-2018/)) where the intent was to share the actual study,
but I don't know the chain of custody.

Here's a direct SciHub link in case others find it preferable: [http://sci-
hub.tw/10.1007/s12108-018-9381-5](http://sci-hub.tw/10.1007/s12108-018-9381-5)

