DISABILITY AND GENDER IN THE SOCIAL WORK LITERATURE: A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS

Öz

This study aims to examine the development, structure, and change in academic research on the intersection of disability and gender in the social work literature using bibliometric analysis. A total of 274 academic articles published between 1992 and 2025 and indexed in SSCI and ESCI databases were analyzed. These 274 academic studies were evaluated using the Bibliometrix package and the Biblioshiny web interface. The findings show that scientific output in the field has grown at an average annual rate of 8.55%. This growth accelerated in 2016 and peaked during the COVID-19 pandemic. It was determined that most of the output in the field is centered in Anglophone countries such as the USA, the UK, Canada, and Australia, and that co-authorship networks remain limited. The most productive journal in the field was found to be “Health & Social Care in the Community”. Thematic mapping analyses revealed that “domestic violence,” “assessment,” and “social work” are the driving themes in the field. In conclusion, the intersection of disability and gender has become an increasingly important area of study in the social work literature. However, there is a need for studies in different geographical contexts and for the development of international research networks.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Intersectionality
• Gender
• Bibliometric analysis
• Disability
• Biblioshiny

Etik Beyan

This research is a bibliometric analysis conducted using secondary metadata from the WoS Core Collection database. Since it does not include human or animal participants and no primary data was collected, ethics committee approval was not required.

SOSYAL HİZMET LİTERATÜRÜNDE ENGELLİLİK VE TOPLUMSAL CİNSİYET: BİBLİYOMETRİK BİR ANALİZ

Öz

Bu çalışmada bibliyometrik analiz yöntemiyle sosyal hizmet literatüründe engellilik ve toplumsal cinsiyet kesişiminde yer alan akademik çalışmaların gelişimini, yapısını ve değişimini incelemek amaçlanmıştır. Çalışmada 1992 ila 2025 yılları arasında yayımlanmış SSCI ve ESCI dizinlerinde taranan toplam 274 akademik makale analiz edilmiştir. İlgili filtreler sonucunda elde edilen 274 akademik çalışma Bibliometrix paketi ve Biblioshiny web arayüzü kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Çalışmada ulaşılan bulgular alandaki bilimsel üretimin yıllık ortalama %8,55 oranında büyüdüğünü göstermiştir. Büyümenin 2016 yılında hız kazandığı ve COVID-19 pandemisi döneminde zirve noktasına ulaştığı görülmüştür. Alandaki üretimin ağırlıklı olarak ABD, Birleşik Krallık, Kanada ve Avustralya gibi Anglo-Sakson ülkeleri merkezinde olduğu ve ortak yazarlık ağlarının sınırlı kaldığı tespit edilmiştir. Alandaki en üretken derginin “Health & Social Care in the Community” olduğu görülmüştür. Tematik haritalama analizleri neticesinde “aile içi şiddet”, “değerlendirme” ve “sosyal hizmet” kavramlarının alandaki yönlendirici motor temalar olduğu ortaya konmuştur. Sonuç olarak engellilik ve toplumsal cinsiyet kesişimi sosyal hizmet literatüründe zamanla daha çok ilgi gören bir çalışma alanı hâline gelmiştir. Bununla birlikte farklı coğrafi bağlamlarda çalışmalara ve uluslararası araştırma ağlarının geliştirilmesine ihtiyaç olduğu görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kesişimsellik
• Toplumsal Cinsiyet
• Bibliyometrik analiz
• Engellilik
• Biblioshiny

Kaynakça

1. Abay, A. R., & Kahraman Güloğlu, F. (2015). Engellilere yönelik temel ulusal mevzuatın toplumsal cinsiyet açısından içerik analizi [The content analysis of basic national legal legislation from the point of gender]. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 8(40), 430-439.
2. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959-975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
3. Bal, G. (2022). Toplumsal cinsiyet açısından ortopedik engelli kadınlara yönelik ayrımcılığın incelenmesi: Zonguldak ili örneği [Analysis of discrimination for orthopedic disabled women in terms of gender: Example of Zonguldak province]. Türkiye İnsan Hakları ve Eşitlik Kurumu Akademik Dergisi, 5(9), 117-156. https://izlik.org/JA66YH55FY
4. Barnes, M. (2011). Abandoning care? A critical perspective on personalisation from an ethic of care. Ethics and Social Welfare, 5(2), 153-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/17496535.2010.484265
5. Baum, N. (2015). The unheard gender: The neglect of men as social work clients. The British Journal of Social Work, 46(5), 1463-1471. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcv074
6. Borglin, G., Jakobsson, U., Edberg, A.-K., & Hallberg, I. R. (2006). Older people in Sweden with various degrees of present quality of life: Their health, social support, everyday activities and sense of coherence. Health & Social Care in the Community, 14(2), 136-146. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2524.2006.00603.x
7. Brooks, N., & Deegan, M. J. (1981). Women and disability: The double handicap. The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 8(2), 229-231. https://doi.org/10.15453/0191-5096.1455
8. Cobo, M. J., Lopez-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the fuzzy sets theory field. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 146-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002

9. Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), 139-167.
10. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241-1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
11. Cummings, S. M. (2002). Predictors of psychological well-being among assisted-living residents. Health & Social Work, 27(4), 293-302. https://doi.org/10.1093/hsw/27.4.293
12. Çoban, R. (2017). Sosyal adalet, eşitlik ve sosyal hizmet [Social justice, equality and social work]. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(4), 252-260.
13. Demir, Y. E., & Gedik, M. (2022). Engelli kavramı ile ilgili akademik yayınların VOSviewer ile bibliyometrik analizi [Bibliometric analysis of academic publications on the concept of disabled with VOSviewer]. Toplumsal Politika Dergisi, 3(1), 12-25. https://izlik.org/JA73DK64NY
14. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
15. Emmett, T., & Alant, E. (2006). Women and disability: Exploring the interface of multiple disadvantage. Development Southern Africa, 23(4), 445-460. https://doi.org/10.1080/03768350600927144
16. Erevelles, N., & Minear, A. (2010). “Unspeakable” offenses: Why is disability missing in discourses of intersectionality in critical race theory? Journal of Educational Foundations, 24(1-2), 3-27.
17. Fine, M., & Asch, A. (1981). Disabled women: Sexism without the pedestal. The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 8(2), 233-248. https://doi.org/10.15453/0191-5096.1456
18. Grenier, A. (2006). The distinction between being and feeling frail: Exploring emotional experiences in health and social care. Journal of Social Work Practice, 20(3), 299-313. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650530600931849
19. Hague, G., Thiara, R. K., & Mullender, A. (2011). Disabled women, domestic violence and social care: The risk of isolation, vulnerability and neglect. The British Journal of Social Work, 41(1), 148-165. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcq057
20. Hicks, S. (2015). Social work and gender: An argument for practical accounts. Qualitative Social Work, 14(4), 471-487. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325014558665
21. Hughes, K., Bellis, M. A., Jones, L., Wood, S., Bates, G., Eckley, L., McCoy, E., Mikton, C., Shakespeare, T., & Officer, A. (2012). Prevalence and risk of violence against adults with disabilities: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. The Lancet, 379(9826), 1621-1629. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61851-5
22. International Federation of Social Workers. (2014). Global definition of social work. https://www.ifsw.org/what-is-social-work/global-definition-of-social-work/
23. Kara, H. Z., & Kutlu, İ. (2026). Bibliometric analysis of social work studies published in WoS from Türkiye. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 23(4), 547-568. https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2025.2541632
24. Katbamna, S., Ahmad, W., Bhakta, P., Baker, R., & Parker, G. (2004). Do they look after their own? Informal support for South Asian carers. Health & Social Care in the Community, 12(5), 398-406. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2524.2004.00509.x
25. Katsui, H., & Swartz, L. (2021). Research methods and practices of doing disability studies in the Global South. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 23(1), 204-213. https://doi.org/10.16993/sjdr.841
26. Kelebek Küçükarslan, G., & Keser Günenç, D. (2026). Mapping the landscape of disability in social work research: A bibliometric analysis. International Social Work. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208728261453703
27. Lecomte, U., Thenot, M., Lethielleux, L., & De los Ríos Berjillos, A. (2025). Professional inclusion of women with disabilities: A bibliometric study focused on intersectionality. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 27(1), 746-762. https://doi.org/10.16993/sjdr.1122
28. Liddiard, K., & Lawthom, R. (2025). Special issue: Disability as a feminist issue. Feminism & Psychology, 35(2), 125-137. https://doi.org/10.1177/09593535251321998
29. Matsuzaka, S., Hudson, K. D., & Ross, A. M. (2021). Operationalizing intersectionality in social work research: Approaches and limitations. Social Work Research, 45(3), 155-167. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/svab014
30. Mattsson, T. (2014). Intersectionality as a useful tool: Anti-oppressive social work and critical reflection. Affilia, 29(1), 8-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109913510659
31. Mehrotra, G. (2010). Toward a continuum of intersectionality theorizing for feminist social work scholarship. Affilia, 25(4), 417-430. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109910384190
32. Muyor-Rodríguez, J., Manzano-Agugliaro, F., & Garrido-Cárdenas, J. A. (2019). The state of global research on social work and disability. Social Work in Health Care, 58(9), 839-853. https://doi.org/10.1080/00981389.2019.1659904
33. National Association of Social Workers. (2016). NASW standards for social work practice in health care settings. https://www.socialworkers.org/Practice/NASW-Practice-Standards-Guidelines/NASW-Standards-for-Social-Work-Practice-in-Health-Care-Settings
34. Nosek, M. A., Foley, C. C., Hughes, R. B., & Howland, C. A. (2001). Vulnerabilities for abuse among women with disabilities. Sexuality and Disability, 19(3), 177-189. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013152530758
35. O’Dea, J. A. (2008). Gender, ethnicity, culture and social class influences on childhood obesity among Australian schoolchildren: Implications for treatment, prevention and community education. Health & Social Care in the Community, 16(3), 282-290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2524.2008.00768.x
36. Oliver, M. (1983). Social work with disabled people. Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-86058-6
37. Stamatopoulos, V. (2018). The young carer penalty: Exploring the costs of caregiving among a sample of Canadian youth. Child & Youth Services, 39(2-3), 180-205. https://doi.org/10.1080/0145935X.2018.1491303
38. Stewart, M. J., Neufeld, A., Harrison, M. J., Spitzer, D., Hughes, K., & Makwarimba, E. (2006). Immigrant women family caregivers in Canada: Implications for policies and programmes in health and social sectors. Health & Social Care in the Community, 14(4), 329-340. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2524.2006.00627.x
39. Thomas, C. (2006). Disability and gender: Reflections on theory and research. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 8(2-3), 177-185. https://doi.org/10.1080/15017410600731368
40. Ubido, J., Huntington, J., & Warburton, D. (2002). Inequalities in access to healthcare faced by women who are deaf. Health & Social Care in the Community, 10(4), 247-253. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2524.2002.00365.x
41. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. (2023). World social report 2023: Leaving no one behind in an ageing world (Report No. ST/ESA/379). United Nations.
42. United Nations Population Fund & Women Enabled International. (2021). The impact of COVID-19 on women and girls with disabilities: A global assessment and case studies on sexual and reproductive health and rights, gender-based violence, and related rights. https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/NEW_UNPRPD_UNFPA_WEI_-_The_Impact_of_COVID-19_on_Women_and_Girls_with_Disabilities.pdf
43. Wendell, S. (1989). Toward a feminist theory of disability. Hypatia, 4(2), 104-124. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.1989.tb00576.x
44. Wickenden, M. (2023). Disability and other identities? -How do they intersect? Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences, 4, 1200386. https://doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2023.1200386
45. Wilde, A., & Fish, R. (2025). Gender, feminism and the project of critical disability studies (CDS). Disability & Society, 40(3), 533-554. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2023.2298774
46. Witten, T. M. (2014). End of life, chronic illness, and trans-identities. Journal of Social Work in End-of-Life & Palliative Care, 10(1), 34-58. https://doi.org/10.1080/15524256.2013.877864
47. World Health Organization. (2011). World report on disability. https://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report/en/
48. World Health Organization. (2024). Measuring violence against women with disability: Data availability, methodological issues and recommendations for good practice. https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/b13d397e-1c31-45e7-b240-a4334dfd8d4b/content
49. Zaks, Z. (2024). Changing the medical model of disability to the normalization model of disability: Clarifying the past to create a new future direction. Disability & Society, 39(12), 3233-3260. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2023.2255926
50. Zupic, I., & Cater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629