Situated knowledges claims about the interferences of disability, gender, and information communication technologies

References

• Al-Azri, K. M. (2013). Social and gender inequality in Oman: The power of religious and political tradition. London, New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Al Busaidy, N. S. M., & Borthwick, A. (2012). Occupational therapy in Oman: The impact of cultural dissonance. Occupational Therapy International, 19, 154–164. doi: 10.1002/oti.1332
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al Zidjaly, N. (2015). Disability, discourse and technology: Agency and inclusion in (inter)action. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28, 801–831. doi: 10.1086/345321
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, London: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
   Google Scholar
• Chappell, A. L. (1998). 14 Still out in the cold: People with learning difficulties and the social model of disability. In T. Shakespeare (Ed.), The disability reader: Social science perspectives (pp. 211–220). London, New York: Cassell.
   Google Scholar
• Crow, L. (1996). Including all of our lives: renewing the social model of disability (Chap. 10). In J. Morris (Ed.), Encounters with strangers: Feminism and disability (pp. 206–226). London: The Women’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusion. (n.d.). Information and Communication Technology (ICT) for inclusion (Chap. 10) Sweden. Retrieved from https://www.european-agency.org/sites/default/files/Sweden.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Galis, V. (2011). Enacting disability: How can science and technology studies inform disability studies? Disability & Society, 26, 825–838. doi: 10.1080/09687599.2011.618737
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geerts, E., & van der Tuin, I. (2013). From intersectionality to interference: Feminist onto-epistemological reflections on the politics of representation. Women’s Studies International Forum, 41, 171–178. doi: 10.1016/j.wsif.2013.07.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustavsson Holmström, M. (2005). 3 Den sociala modellen. In B. Danermark (Ed.), Sociologiska perspektiv på funktionshinder och handikapp [Sociological perspectives of disability and handicap] (pp. 59–82). Lund: Studentlitteratur.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. J. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. J. (1996). Modest witness: Feminist diffractions in science studies. In P. Galison, & D. J. Stamp (Eds.), The disunity of the science: Boundaries, contexts, and power (pp. 428–442). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. J. (1997). Modest_Witness@Second_Millenium.FemaleMan©_Meets_OncomouseTM: Feminism and technoscience. New York, London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. (2004). The Haraway reader. New York, London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Harding, S. (1986). The science question in feminism. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Information Technology Authority (n.d.). Disabled-members empowerment. Retrieved from http://www.eoman.gov.om/wps/wcm/connect/en/site/home/gov/gov12/gov1203/gov12033/
   Google Scholar
• Information Technology Authority. (2016). Women’s digital empowerment. Retrieved from https://omanportal.gov.om/wps/portal/index/interact/!ut/p/a0/04_Sj9CPykssy0xPLMnMz0vMAfGjzOKDvbydgj1NjAz83YINDTwdPT2cnR1DjAxDzfSDU_P0C7IdFQElaFw_/?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/EN/site/home/gov/gov12/gov1203/gov12034/&WCM_PORTLET=PC_Z7_SJKBSI420OFS10IAIHCCAT2111000000_WCM&lang=en.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. London, New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Llewellyn, A., & Hogan, K. (2000). The use and abuse of models of disability. Disability & Society, 15, 157–165. doi: 10.1080/09687590025829
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lykke, N. (2010). Feminist studies: A guide to intersectional theory, methodology and writing. New York, London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Enterprise, Energy and Communications. (2011). ICT for everyone: A digital agenda for Sweden. Retrieved from http://www.government.se/contentassets/8512aaa8012941deaee5cf9594e50ef4/ict-for-everyone—a-digital-agenda-for-sweden
   Google Scholar
• Mol, A. (1999). Ontological politics. A word and some questions. In J. Law, & J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor-network theory and after (pp. 74–89). Oxford, Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Morris, J. (1991). Pride against prejudice: A personal politics of disability. London: The Women’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moser, I. B. (2003). Road traffic accidents: The ordering of subjects, bodies and disability (Doctoral thesis). University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
   Google Scholar
• Moser, I. (2005). On becoming disabled and articulating alternatives: The multiple modes of ordering disability and their interferences. Cultural Studies, 19, 667–700. doi:10.1080/09502380500365648
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moser, I. (2006a). Disability and the promises of technology: Technology, subjectivity and embodiment within an order of the normal. Information, Communication & Society, 9, 373–395. doi: 10.1080/13691180600751348
   Google Scholar
• Moser, I. (2006b). Sociotechnical practices and difference: On the interferences between disability, gender, and class. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 31, 537–564. doi: 10.1177/0162243906289611
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moser, I. (2009). A body that matters? The role of embodiment in the recomposition of life after a road traffic accident. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 11, 83–99. doi: 10.1080/15017410902830520
   Google Scholar
• Näslund, R. (2003). Gender, technology and disability: Building up a research plan. In C. Mörtberg, P. Elovaara, & A. Lundgren (Eds.), How do we make a difference?: Information technology, transnational democracy and gender (pp. 191–200). Luleå: Luleå University of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Näslund, R. (2009). Bringing actors together: ICT, disability and pupils in special school (Licentiate thesis). Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden).
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, M. (1996). Understanding disability: From theory to practice (New ed.). Basingstoke and London: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Said Zahlan, R. (1998). The making of the modern Gulf states: Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Oman (Revised and updated ed.). Reading: Ithaca Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shakespeare, T. (2006). Disability rights and wrongs. London, New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, D. E. (1988). The everyday world as problematic: A feminist sociology. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, D. E. (1999). Writing the social: Critique, theory, and investigations. Toronto, Buffalo, London: University of Toronto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Söderström, S. (2009). Ungdom, teknologi og funksjonshemming: En studie av IKTs betydning i dagliglivet til ungdommer som har en funksjonsnedsettelse [Youth, technology, and disability: A study of the meaning of ICT in everyday lives of youths with disabilities] (Doctoral thesis). Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet, Trondheim, Norway.
   Google Scholar
• Wajcman, J. (1991). Feminism confronts technology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wamala, C. (2010). Does IT count? Complexities between access to and use of information technologies among Uganda’s farmers (Doctoral thesis). Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden.
   Google Scholar