000			01457naa a2200181uu 4500
001			7011018421021
003			OSt
005			20190211162220.0
008			070110s2006 xx ||||gr |0|| 0 eng d
100	1		_aDOUGLAS, Susan J. _929985
245	1	0	_aPersonal influence and the bracketing of women's history
260			_aThousand Oaks : _bSAGE, _cNovember 2006
520	3		_aThis article reviews both what Personal Influence revealed about the two-step flow within women's inter-personal networks and what it failed to capture about women's experiences during the tumultuous changes in gender roles between 1945, when the data were collected, and 1955, when the study was published. One of the central contradictions of the Decatur Study is that it simultaneously disguises that it is women who are being studied here yet universalizes them as representative of the general population. But the article also argues that despite the blind spots and ahistoricity of Personal Influence, it was a crucial reminder that women, despite being individual targets of much media fare, were also embedded in social networks through which they influenced other women and were, in turn, influenced by them
773	0	8	_tThe Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science _g608, p. 41-50 _dThousand Oaks : SAGE, November 2006 _xISSN 00027162 _w
942			_cS
998			_a20070110 _b1842^b _cNatália
998			_a20100715 _b1501^b _cDaiane
999			_aConvertido do Formato PHL _bPHL2MARC21 1.1 _c21484 _d21484
041			_aeng