Brosnan, C. (2015). “Quackery” in the academy? Professional knowledge, autonomy and the debate over complementary medicine degrees. Sociology, 49(6), 1047–1064.
Caldwell, E. F. (2017). Quackademia? Mass-media delegitimation of homeopathy education. Science as Culture. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2017.1316253
Capra, F. (1975). The Tao of physics: An exploration of the parallels between modern physics and eastern mysticism. Boston, MA: Shambhala Publications.
Carpenter, J., Hagemaster, J., & Joiner, B. (1998). To the editor. An even closer look at therapeutic touch. JAMA, 280(22), 1905.
Christensen, V. A., & Casper, M. J. (2000). Hormone mimics and disrupted bodies: Social worlds analysis of a scientific controversy. Sociological Perspectives, (Suppl.),: S93–S120.
Clarke, A., & Montini, T. (1993). The many faces of RU486: Tales of situated knowledges and technological contestations. Science, Technology & Human Values, 18(1), 42–78.
Clarke, A., & Star, S. L. (2008). The social worlds framework: A theory/methods package. In E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 113–138). Cambridge, MA; London: MIT Press.
Daley, B. (1997). Therapeutic touch, nursing practice and contemporary cutaneous wound healing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 25, 1123–1132.
Derkatch, C. (2016). Bounding biomedicine: Evidence and rhetoric in the new science of alternative medicine. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Fahnestock, J. (2009). The rhetoric of the natural sciences. In A. A. Lunsford, K. H. Wilson, & R. A. Eberly (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of rhetorical studies (pp. 175–195). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington, DC: SAGE Publications.
Forstorp, P. (2005). The construction of pseudo-science: Science patrolling and knowledge policing by academic prefects and weeders. VEST, 18(3–4), 17–71.
Garrety, K. (1997). Social worlds, actor-networks and controversy: The case of cholesterol, dietary fat and heart disease. Social Studies of Science, 27(5), 727–773.
Gieryn, T. F. (1999). Cultural boundaries of science: Credibility on the line. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Givati, A., & Hatton, K. (2015). Traditional acupuncturists and higher education in Britain: The dual, paradoxical impact of biomedical alignment on the holistic view. Social Science & Medicine, 131, 173–180.
Henttonen, I. (1996, May 28). Health terror debated in Hämeenlinna. “Parseans” defend patient-centredness. Hämeen sanomat.
Kalkas, H. (1997). Ethical dilemma column “What are the ethics of research and teaching in nursing science like?” Sairaanhoitaja [Nurse], 70(2), 32.
Krieger, D. (1979). The therapeutic touch: How to use your hands to help or to heal. New York: Prentice Hall Press.
Laiho, A. (2012). The evolving landscape of nursing science in the 21st century—The Finnish case. In P. Trowler, M. Saunders, & V. Bamber (Eds.), Tribes and territories in the 21st century: Rethinking the significance of disciplines in higher education (pp. 107–117). London and New York: Routledge.
Lauri, S. (1996, June 20). Nursing respecting the patient not new. Helsingin sanomat.
Lyyra, T. (1997). Therapeutic touch? Tehy, 2, 40.
Meehan, T. C. (1998). Therapeutic touch as a nursing intervention. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 28(1), 117–125.
Nieminen, H. (1996). Phenomenology, Parse and nursing science. Hoitotiede [Nursing Science], 8(3), 158–161.
Nieminen, P. (2008). Caught in the science trap? A case study of the relationship between nurses and “their” science. In J. Välimaa & O. Ylijoki (Eds.), Cultural perspectives on higher education (pp. 127–141). New York: Springer.
Nowotny, H. (1975). Controversies in science: Remarks on the different modes of production of knowledge and their use. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 4(1), 34–45.
Nursing Science Departmental Committee. (1996). Meeting minutes, 17 December. Nursing Science Departmental Committee, University of Tampere.
Ollikainen, M. (1996a). Humbug Award 1996: Humbug does not belong in nursing science: Interview with Professor Marita Paunonen. Skeptikko [Sceptic], 4(96), 12–15.
Ollikainen, M. (1996b). Spiritual healing for nurses? Yliopisto [University], 20(96), 38–39.
O’Mathúna, D. (1998). Janforum: Feedback—Therapeutic touch. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 27(1), 230.
O’Mathúna, D., Pryjmachuk, S., Spencer, W., Stanwick, M., & Matthiesen, S. (2002). A critical evaluation of the theory and practice of therapeutic touch. Nursing Philosophy, 3(2), 163–176.
Rantala, S. (1997). Philosophical theory of nursing. Book review of parse: Illuminations. Tehy, 13, 52.
Rautajoki, A. (1993). An analysis and a redefinition of the concept Therapeutic Touch. Master’s thesis. University of Tampere, Department of Nursing Science.
Rautajoki, A. (1996). Therapeutic touch. Helsinki: Kirjayhtymä.
Rautajoki, A. (1997). Does nursing science scuttle its own teachings? Yliopisto [University], 2(97), 29–30.
Rosa, L., Rosa, E., Sarner, L., & Barrett, S. (1998). A close look at therapeutic touch. JAMA, 279(13), 1005–1010.
Routasalo, P. (1997). Book review on Anja Rautajoki: Therapeutic touch. Sairaanhoitaja [Nurse], 70(2), 38.
Saano, V., & Puustinen, R. (1997a). Belief medication—The new direction for nursing? The example of therapeutic touch. Suomen lääkärilehti [Finnish Medical Journal] 18–19, 2306.
Saano, V., & Puustinen, R. (1997b). Humbug-awarded nursing teaching from the United States. Skeptikko [Sceptic], 1(97), 30–35.
Segal, J. Z. (2009). Rhetoric of health and medicine. In A. A. Lunsford, K. H. Wilson, & R. A. Eberly (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of rhetorical studies (pp. 227–245). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington, DC: SAGE Publications.
Shibutani, T. (1955). Reference groups as perspectives. American Journal of Sociology, 60(6), 562–569.
Spitzer, A., & Perrenoud, B. (2006). Reforms in nursing education across Western Europe: Implementation processes and current status. Journal of Professional Nursing, 22(3), 162–171.
Statement. (1996). Humbug Award 1996 (Author unknown). Skeptikko [Sceptic], 4(96), 10–11.
Strauss, A. (1978). A social world perspective. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, 1, 119–128.
Turner, J. G., Clark, A. J., Gauthier, D. K., & Williams, M. (1998). The effect of therapeutic touch on pain and anxiety in burn patients. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 28(1), 10–20.
Unruh, D. R. (1979). Characteristics and types of participation in social worlds. Symbolic Interaction, 2(2), 115–129.
Venäläinen, R. (1997). Theories are being argued over at the department of nursing science: Is the student’s legal protection in danger? Aviisi [Student Journal], 3(97), 9.
Vuolanto, P. (2013). Boundary-work and the vulnerability of academic status: The case of Finnish nursing science. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 1867. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
Vuolanto, P. (2015). Boundary work and power in the controversy over therapeutic touch in Finnish nursing science. Minerva, 53(4), 359–380.
Vuolanto, P. (2017). The universities’ transformation thesis revisited: A case study of the relationship between nursing science and society. Science and Technology Studies, 30(2), 34–52.
Webster, A. (2007). Health, technology and society: A sociological critique. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wilcox, S. (2010). Lay knowledge: The missing middle of the expertise debates. In R. Harris, N. Wathen, & S. Wyatt (Eds.), Configuring health consumers: Health work and the imperative of personal responsibility (pp. 45–64). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wirth, D. P., Richardson, J. T., Eidelman, W. S., & O’Malley, A. C. (1993). Full thickness dermal wounds treated with non-contact therapeutic touch: A replication and extension. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 1(3), 127–132.
Wyatt, S., Harris, R., & Wathen, N. (2010). Health(y) citizenship: Technology, work and narratives of responsibility. In R. Harris, N. Wathen, & S. Wyatt (Eds.), Configuring health consumers: Health work and the imperative of personal responsibility (pp. 1–10). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.