Disrupting Political Science: Black Women Reimagining the Discipline by Angela K Lewis-Maddox
Clicks: 1
ID: 320250
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
1 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #75 of 75 articles by views in political science quarterly
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Newly minted political science Ph.D.'s are likely not assigned to read Merze Tate (Ph.D. Government, Harvard University, 1941), Jewel Limar Prestage (Ph.D. Political Science, University of Iowa, 1954), or Mae Coates King (Ph.D. Political Science, University of Idaho, 1968). Burgeoning practitioners further lack an appreciation of their leadership to building and sustaining the discipline's institutional arms whether by receiving international fellowships (Fulbright, as in the case of Tate), founding professional organizations (National Conference of Black Political Scientists, in the case of Prestage), or staffing them (American Political Science Association, in the case of King). Disrupting Political Science: Black Women Reimagining the Discipline compiles sixteen interventions explaining how Black women's contributions to the field continue to go “unnoticed,” ensuring that emerging scholars are privy to their collective labor. The authors identify Black women in political science with a variety of transformative phrases: “good trouble-makers” (Alexander-Floyd), “space-invaders” (Lewis-Maddox), “rhythm-disruptors” (Melonas), “joy-cultivators” (Nwakanma), “risk-takers” (Willoughby-Herard et al.), and “paradigm-shifters” (Hossein). These descriptors are further amplified through the book's central method—autoethnography, an approach that seeks to describe and systematically analyze personal experience to understand cultural experience. With segments included in What Political Science Can Learn from the Humanities edited by R.A.W. Rhodes and Susan Hodgett (2021) and the Encyclopedia of Critical Political Science edited by Clyde W. Barrow (2024), this approach appears relatively new to the field; however, the contributors to Disrupting Political Science keenly show its importance for vulnerable participants like Black women in reclaiming their agency, rest, and mirth while coping with “being an outsider within” (Bonnette-Bailey), constantly having to “prove that they matter” (Jordan-Zachery), carrying high service loads (Peterson), mitigating harassment (Austin), or a combination thereof. Methodologically, it also makes room for a foundational critique of the discipline's origins that continues to haunt its venues for scholarly distribution: “John W. Burgess considered the founder of political science . . . viewed Blacks as an inferior race and saw slavery as a positive institution. The first political science journal, Political Science Quarterly, helped perpetuate this view, as Burgess served as an editor” (4).
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7167818993
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Jasmine Noelle Yarish |
| Journal | political science quarterly |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/psquar/qqag050
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.