f Een alternatieve sociologische canon: Een feest der erkenning

References

1. Burlyuk, O. & Rahbari, L. (2023). Migrant Academics’ Narratives of Precarity and Resilience in Europe. Open Book Publishershttps://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0331
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bol, T., de Vaan, M., & van de Rijt, A. (2022). Gender-equal funding rates conceal unequal evaluations. Research Policy, 51(1), 104399.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Ceci, S. J., & Williams, W. M. (2011). Understanding current causes of women’s underrepresentation in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(8), 3157-3162.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Hofstra, B., Kulkarni, V. V., Munoz-Najar Galvez, S., He, B., Jurafsky, D., & McFarland, D. A. (2020). The diversity–innovation paradox in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(17), 9284-9291.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Spierings, N., & Janssen, M. L. (2016). Gender in het huidige sociologieonderwijs: Thema en/of perspectief?. Tijdschrift voor Genderstudies, 19(2), 165-185.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Visitatiecommissie Sociologie (2020). RESEARCH REVIEW SOCIOLOGY 2013-2018. De Onderzoekerij. https://www.ru.nl/sites/default/files/2022-10/assessment_report_sociologie.pdf.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Volker, B., & Steenbeek, W. (2015). No evidence that gender contributes to personal research funding success in The Netherlands: A reaction to van der Lee and Ellemers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(51), E7036-E7037.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Wekker, G. (2020). Witte onschuld: Paradoxen van kolonialisme en ras, herziene editie. Amsterdam University Press.
   [Google Scholar]