Epistemic Authority Research Articles

What Does That Mean? Complementizers and Epistemic Authority.

A core goal of research in language is to understand the factors that guide choice of linguistic form where more than one option is syntactically well-formed. We discuss one case of optionality that has generated longstanding discussion: the choice of either using or dropping the English complementizer that in sentences like I think (that) the cat followed the dog. Existing psycholinguistic analyses tie that-usage to production pressures associated with sentence planning (Ferreira & Dell, 2000), avoidance of ambiguity (Hawkins, 2004), and relative information density (Jaeger, 2010). Building on observations from cross-linguistic fieldwork, we present a novel proposal in which English that can serve to mark a speaker's "epistemic authority" over the information packaged within the embedded clause; that is, it indicates that the speaker has more knowledge of the embedded proposition compared with their addressee and thus has a perspective that they believe their addressee doesn't share. Testing this proposal with a forced-choice task and a series of corpus surveys, we find that English that is keyed to the use of embedded speaker (first-person) subject pronouns and occurs in sentences containing newsworthy information. Our account of that-optionality takes into account why that is associated with both (i) a dense information signal and (ii) semantic-pragmatic content, as well as extending to cases of non-optionality in subject/sentence-initial clauses (e.g., *(That) the cat is following the dog, I already know) and fragment answers (e.g., What do you already know? *(That) the cat is following the dog), where that is required.

Complaint formulation and negotiation: The use of zenme-interrogatives in e-commerce service encounters

In Mandarin Chinese, zenme-interrogatives serve a dual purpose. First, they can be employed to inquire about the precise cause or reason for an occurrence, as in the case of causal zenme (“how come”). Second, they can be applied to seek information about the specific method for performing a task, as in the case of manner zenme (“how do you”). Drawing on data from Taobao (a prominent Chinese online shopping platform), this study investigates the application of causal zenme in the formulation and negotiation of customer complaints during Chinese e-commerce service encounters. It also conducts a nuanced analysis of the normative practices that underlie customer complaints. The analysis reveals that zenme-interrogatives are frequently employed to highlight deviations from normative business practices at the epistemic and deontic levels. At the epistemic level, these interrogatives are used to challenge agents’ asserted epistemic authority, or they point to agents’ disregard for customers’ entitlement to necessary information. At the deontic level, they are used to infringe upon customers’ deontic authority in receiving compensation or benefiting from other remedial actions. Overall, the findings contribute to our comprehension of how zenme-interrogatives are utilized to convey negative evaluations and emotions rather than simply solicit information or explanations.

Struggling with exactitude in a fragmented state: Intelligence testing in early twentieth-century China.

This article examines the rise and decline of the enthusiasm for intelligence testing in early twentieth-century China, focusing on the appeal, the challenges, and the critiques revolving around this psychological instrument. The introduction of intelligence testing reflected not only China's urgent needs in modernizing its merit system, but also Chinese psychologists' aspirations for pursuing exactitude and redefining the racial characteristics of their compatriots against foreign interpretations. But despite psychologists' endeavors, the political and geographical fragmentation of Republican China troubled the epistemic imperative of uniformity demanded by Euro-American psychometrics and therefore undermined the validity of measurement. Subsequently, the legitimacy of intelligence testing began to be questioned by several influential Chinese psychologists in the late 1920s and 30s. The difficulties in standardization and the hostility within the psychology community formed a vicious cycle, impeding the progress of nationwide testing. Through this history, the article demonstrates not only the elevation of measurement to epistemic authority in modern China, but also how its promise was challenged by a diverse and rapidly changing society.

Reclaiming misandry from misogynistic rhetoric

In recent years, misogyny has become a central concept in philosophy as well as an established concept in public discourse and political policy. But where is misogyny’s supposed counterpart, namely, misandry? In this article, I argue for an ameliorative analysis of ‘misandry’, arguing that it can be reformulated in an effort to reclaim it from misogynistic weaponisation. The term ‘misandry’ is used almost exclusively as a misogynistic rhetorical device for attributing unjust anger, hatred or other similar emotions to a speaker, thereby undermining their epistemic authority. Rather than dismissing the term as conceptually flawed and politically problematic, I argue that we ought to ameliorate misandry to instead refer to a felt anger, hostility or fear towards the patriarchal social order and its valorisation and/or expression in misogynistic and machismo behaviour. To support these claims, I begin with a discussion of Kate Manne’s analysis of misogyny before reflecting on how this can inform our understanding of misandry. I then demonstrate the various ways in which misandry is rhetorically deployed as a means of silencing speakers who express dissent against the patriarchy. Following this, I argue that we should ameliorate the term, not only to undermine these misogynistic practices but also to articulate a legitimate affective and reactive attitude against the patriarchal imposition of a hierarchical gender binary.

Enacting Journalistic Authority: The Communicative Challenges and Competences of Live Two-Way Correspondents in Swedish Public Service Broadcasting

ABSTRACT Whenever a major event flares up in the world, we are bound to be met by correspondents reporting live on the news. The correspondents are typically promoted as authoritative voices. Their live talk is delivered in “the live two-way,” a broadcast interaction between the presenter and the correspondent on location. Focusing on live reporting during the Ukraine–Russia war (2022–), this study analyses the communicative work that goes on in the live two-way, and how correspondents handle the tasks related to the enactments of epistemic authority. A conceptual framework is applied defining the communicative and epistemic dimension of the live two-way. This study applies a discourse approach and focuses on experienced correspondents in Swedish public service. Data consists of 30 live two-ways and interviews with 5 of the journalists about planning and execution of the live reporting. Results show how practices and roles separated in other genres of news are integrated in the complex work of the correspondent who is expected to fluently report from location, convey a sense of being there, present facts, and analyse and explain. This study indicates different styles of reporting when correspondents alternate between a careful and confident stance as they balance their commitments to truth.

Epistemic domination by data extraction: questioning the use of biometrics and mobile phone data analysis in asylum procedures

ABSTRACT In a growing number of destination countries state authorities have started to use various digital devices such as analysis of data captured from mobile phones to verify asylum seekers’ claimed country of origin. This move has prompted some critics to claim that asylum decision-making is increasingly delegated to machines. Based on fieldwork at a reception centre in Germany, this paper mobilises insights from science and technology studies (STS) to develop a framework that allows for more nuanced analyses and modes of critiques of the digitisation of asylum procedures. Rather than thinking human and non-human forms of agency as external to one another in order to juxtapose them in a zero-sum game, I comprehend the introduction of digital technologies as a reconfiguration of existing human-machine configurations. This conception highlights how the use digital technologies enables caseworkers to retain their position as an epistemic authority in asylum decision-making by assembling clues about asylum seekers’ country of origin generated by digital technologies into hard juridical evidence. Subsequently, I develop an alternative critique that focuses on epistemic implications of the digitisation of asylum procedures. I identify a particular version of data colonialism that enables epistemic domination by means of data extraction.

The Role of Materiality in an Era of Generative Artificial Intelligence

AbstractThe introduction of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools like ChatGPT has raised many challenging questions about the nature of teaching, learning, and assessment in every subject area, including science. Unlike other disciplines, natural science is unique because the ontological and epistemological understanding of nature is fundamentally rooted in our interaction with material objects in the physical world. GenAI, powered by statistical probability arising from a massive corpus of text, is devoid of any connection to the physical world. The use of GenAI thus raises concerns about our connection to reality and its effect on science education. This paper emphasizes the importance of materiality (or material reality) in shaping scientific knowledge and argues for its recognition in the era of GenAI. Drawing on the perspectives of new materialism and science studies, the paper highlights how materiality forms an indispensable aspect of human knowledge and meaning-making, particularly in the discipline of science. It further explains how materiality is central to the epistemic authority of science and cautions the outputs generated by GenAI that lack contextualization to a material reality. The paper concludes by providing recommendations for research and teaching that recognize the role of materiality in the context of GenAI, specifically in practical work, scientific argumentation, and learning with GenAI. As we navigate a future dominated by GenAI, understanding how the epistemic authority of science arises from our connection to the physical world will become a crucial consideration in science education.

Re-theorising namûs beyond ‘honour’: self-making, feminist agency and global epistemic justice

Namûs describes a ‘way of life’ integral to Kurdish sociality and to the sense of self for many Kurds who live it in a plurality of ways. Constituting a form of power over the subject which can potentially take the form of domination, namûs is also a social relation of care and power between subjects and is integral to its subject's ethical relationship of self-to-self and processes of self-making. Post-Enlightenment and liberal frameworks of ‘modern’ selfhood, however, have tended to render namûs equivalent to ‘honour’ and ‘honour-based violence’ (‘HBV’). Through this act of mistranslation, a life with namûs is constructed as violent, unworthy, racially inferior and harmful to women. Building upon multi-sited ethnographic fieldwork conducted in North Kurdistan, Turkey and Denmark, this article originally theorises namûs as a practice of ethical self-making that is epistemic, dignified and agentic in all its complexities. Women living with and through namûs actively work to cultivate this way of being, thereby interrupting the epistemic authority of liberal feminism. Namûs, this article argues, cannot be understood through blanket explanations of ‘crime’, ‘oppression’ and ‘patriarchy’, as the discourse on ‘honour’ would suggest. Breaking away from these injurious portrayals is, therefore, vital to realise global epistemological justice.

From celebration to utilisation: How linguistic diversity can reduce epistemic inequalities

Working towards reconciliation, the undoing of structural inequalities and segregation often means transforming ‘white spaces’ into less white spaces, including but not restricted to Christian communities. However, it is often overlooked that greater representation of people of colour does not automatically challenge the epistemic authority that tends to rest with white people and/or Eurocentric knowledge systems.This was the backdrop of a study carried out in a multi-‘racial’ South African congregation. The purpose was to understand how white people conceptualised and worked for reconciliation in a context they were culturally dominating. A constructivist grounded theory approach was used to generate and analyse data through ethnographic methods and relationship-based learning of isiXhosa.This article presents the problem identified – the ‘coloniality of knowledge’ in ‘reconciling’ Christian communities. To challenge it and to render theologising more relevant in the intercultural contact zone, several concrete suggestions are subsequently made. They are focussed on creating environments favourable to embracing cultural-linguistic differences and to harnessing them for increased gospel relevance and epistemic equality. The value and the cost of such transformation will be discussed in the end with reference to the South African context.Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: Seeking relationships on the terms of the ‘other’ enables more profound ways of sharing different experiences of the gospel. This approach of decolonising theology can increase cultural and epistemic justice with implications for practical and systematic theology, mission and reconciliation studies, and research in general in cross-cultural settings.

Bridging the gaping hole: central bank economists’ role in the rise of macro-finance post-crisis

AbstractHow has mainstream academic economic discourse evolved to regain its epistemic authority after the financial crisis of 2008 revealed serious blind spots in economic modelling that shattered the profession’s claim to be able to predict and control macroeconomic variables? To answer this question, we combine content with bibliometric analyses of nearly 70,000 papers on macroeconomics and finance published in academic journals from 1990 to 2019. These analyses reveal how a structural rapprochement between macroeconomics and finance created the new subfield of macro-finance. We show that contributions by central bank economists, driven by central banks’ newly acquired macroprudential mandate, were key to its establishment. Acting within the space of regulatory science, they connected macroeconomic and financial knowledge to satisfy their employers’ administrative needs, while also helping to bridge the gaping hole in economic discourse, thereby taking on an important stabilizing role for the epistemic authority of economics.

The ‘absent Black father’ metaphor: analyzing education’s pathological pursuit of Black male surrogates

ABSTRACT In this paper, we utilize the concepts of racial knowledge and subjective understanding to demonstrate how the metaphor of surrogacy encodes a racialized discourse via the epistemic authority of social science research. Taken together, we demonstrate how the pervasive use of surrogacy as a metaphor reflects the subjective understanding of Black male teachers produced through the racial knowledge of social science discourse. We argue that the metaphor of surrogacy has become so unquestioningly ubiquitous throughout education and popular culture that it has become the default conceptual framework regarding all reforms for Black young men and boys.

Re-evaluating the Epistemic Authority of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses in Contemporary Clinical Discourse.

How to cite this article: Yadav S. Re-evaluating the Epistemic Authority of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses in Contemporary Clinical Discourse. J Contemp Dent Pract 2023;24(12):919-920. Keywords: Evidence-based medicine, Evidence-based science, Meta-analyses, Systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Decolonizing the Presentation of Research Findings: Amplifying Epistemic Authority Through Poetic Re-Storying

<p>Western-centric epistemologies are often deemed to be more legitimate than non-western ones for driving academic research and knowledge production. As a result, non-western epistemologies are often colonized or silenced during the research process. Decolonizing research practices, such as robust collaboration, mutual respect, mindful listening, and co-constructed interviews offer meaningful opportunities for researchers vested in engaging in research which honors and amplifies a diversity of storied experiences and non-dominant epistemologies. This paper focuses on decolonizing research report writing through poetic re-storying and will include a rationale for and excerpts from a poetic re-storying of research findings from a narrative inquiry project with Parvana, an Afghan woman who until recently was living in Afghanistan; the narrative study is theoretically and conceptually informed by postcolonial feminist theory and the decolonization of research methods. By carefully and collaboratively crafting the research findings in poetic form using original excerpts from open-ended interviews, co-constructed interview conversations, Parvana’s written stories, conversations about artifacts, and other data sources, Parvana and I worked together to amplify and honor her epistemic authority and literacy practices. In addition to presenting the research findings in research participants’ own words, creative re-storying through poetry makes research findings accessible to academic and non-academic audiences alike while also cultivating emotional engagement and empathy.</p>

Defining Personality: Epistemic Authority in Recruitment Interviews

Personality testing is an elementary part of recruitment. The test results are increasingly considered a necessary means of obtaining information about candidates’ personalities and suitability. This has raised questions about who has the right to define a candidate’s personality in recruitment interviews. Here, we use conversation analysis to describe two strategies through which recruiters evaluate candidates’ personalities based on the personality test results and show how these methods are linked to different interactional affordances. We recommend the candidate-driven strategy that attends to the candidates’ fundamental right to define their personality in a situation where their career is at stake.

On authentic questions in academic writing tutorials: Epistemic authority and the co-construction of knowledge

The present paper examines dialogic interaction in educational contexts by problematising the role of authentic questions advocated by proponents of dialogic pedagogy. We begin by reviewing research on questions in teacher-fronted discourse, while critically assessing the types of knowledge these questions target and their potential to result in dialogic interaction. We then move to the context of academic writing tutorials, which differ significantly with respect to the knowledge the participants bring to the conversation, and where authentic questions have received relatively little attention. We analyse tutor questions and their sequential unfolding in tutorials where the tutors have the relevant subject-specific knowledge and where they do not – and where authentic questions prevail. The framework of epistemics, as developed in conversation analysis, allows us to establish the extent to which these questions result in the co-construction of new understandings of the assignment topic.

Research repertoires and boundary work in the search for extra-terrestrial intelligence (SETI)

ABSTRACT The idea of scouting the sky in search of extra-terrestrial signals (SETI) was first proposed in the late 1950s; soon afterwards, its scope was formalised in the so-called Drake Equation, a probabilistic argument to gauge the number of ‘civilisations’ capable of radio communication on the basis of astronomical, biological and cultural factors. Since then, radio telescopes around the world have been searching for an artificial signal from elsewhere in the universe, a sign of extraterrestrial communication. How have SETI practitioners claimed scientific legitimacy and epistemic authority over the search for extra-terrestrial life, a matter often regarded to be at the very periphery of science? And how have they succeeded (or failed) in maintaining them over time? The historical trajectory of SETI offers the opportunity to investigate how, over time, an interdisciplinary community coalesced around a research repertoire and navigated ebbs and flows of interest by rearticulating the methods and scope of their research. The ‘probability repertoire’ around which the SETI community coalesced is an evolving entity, entailing significant boundary work. As with every successful repertoire, it is a flexible but always entailing a recognisable alignment of material, social and epistemic components instrumental for a research community in gaining recognition and negotiating its epistemic positioning within the always shifting boundaries of science.

Healthy Mistrust: Medical Black Box Algorithms, Epistemic Authority, and Preemptionism.

In the ethics of algorithms, a specifically epistemological analysis is rarely undertaken in order to gain a critique (or a defense) of the handling of or trust in medical black box algorithms (BBAs). This article aims to begin to fill this research gap. Specifically, the thesis is examined according to which such algorithms are regarded as epistemic authorities (EAs) and that the results of a medical algorithm must completely replace other convictions that patients have (preemptionism). If this were true, it would be a reason to distrust medical BBAs. First, the author describes what EAs are and why BBAs can be considered EAs. Then, preemptionism will be outlined and criticized as an answer to the question of how to deal with an EA. The discussion leads to some requirements for dealing with a BBA as an EA.

From lived experience to lived expertise: How donor-conceived witnesses claim and sustain epistemic authority

Scholars in pragmatics have long been interested in how knowledge is construed, contested and legitimised. Much recent work in pragmatics has focused on developing more detailed theoretical understandings of epistemic positioning and epistemic authority, including in institutional contexts which are typically characterised by knowledge asymmetries and power inequalities. Yet the relational consequences of epistemic positioning have received little attention, therefore, this article aimed to investigate how authority and community are simultaneously negotiated in interaction, turn by turn. Taking a social semiotic approach, combining analysis using exchange structure, evidence and epistemic stance frameworks, this article examines a public hearing of the 2010 Senate Committee Inquiry into Donor Conception in Australia. Findings reveal four cumulative discursive patterns: donor-conceived witnesses positioned their lived experience as non-negotiable, cast doubt on fertility practitioners' expertise, layered opinions upon experience and employed recognised knowledges to bolster authority. This article introduces the concept of ‘lived expertise’; that is, authority grounded in experience and sustained through awareness of additional forms of experiential and institutional knowledges. Empirically, this study sheds light on how donor-conceived people – as people with lived experience – expand the subject positions afforded to them in institutional contexts, inviting legitimacy and belonging.

AI-driven decision support systems and epistemic reliance: a qualitative study on obstetricians’ and midwives’ perspectives on integrating AI-driven CTG into clinical decision making

BackgroundGiven that AI-driven decision support systems (AI-DSS) are intended to assist in medical decision making, it is essential that clinicians are willing to incorporate AI-DSS into their practice. This study takes as a case study the use of AI-driven cardiotography (CTG), a type of AI-DSS, in the context of intrapartum care. Focusing on the perspectives of obstetricians and midwives regarding the ethical and trust-related issues of incorporating AI-driven tools in their practice, this paper explores the conditions that AI-driven CTG must fulfill for clinicians to feel justified in incorporating this assistive technology into their decision-making processes regarding interventions in labor.MethodsThis study is based on semi-structured interviews conducted online with eight obstetricians and five midwives based in England. Participants were asked about their current decision-making processes about when to intervene in labor, how AI-driven CTG might enhance or disrupt this process, and what it would take for them to trust this kind of technology. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed with thematic analysis. NVivo software was used to organize thematic codes that recurred in interviews to identify the issues that mattered most to participants. Topics and themes that were repeated across interviews were identified to form the basis of the analysis and conclusions of this paper.ResultsThere were four major themes that emerged from our interviews with obstetricians and midwives regarding the conditions that AI-driven CTG must fulfill: (1) the importance of accurate and efficient risk assessments; (2) the capacity for personalization and individualized medicine; (3) the lack of significance regarding the type of institution that develops technology; and (4) the need for transparency in the development process.ConclusionsAccuracy, efficiency, personalization abilities, transparency, and clear evidence that it can improve outcomes are conditions that clinicians deem necessary for AI-DSS to meet in order to be considered reliable and therefore worthy of being incorporated into the decision-making process. Importantly, healthcare professionals considered themselves as the epistemic authorities in the clinical context and the bearers of responsibility for delivering appropriate care. Therefore, what mattered to them was being able to evaluate the reliability of AI-DSS on their own terms, and have confidence in implementing them in their practice.

Facts, values, and the epistemic authority of journalism: How journalists use and define the terms fake news, junk news, misinformation, and disinformation

Abstract In this article, we examine how journalists try to uphold ideals of objectivity, clarity, and epistemic authority when using four overlapping terms: fake news, junk news, misinformation, and disinformation. Drawing on 16 qualitative interviews with journalists in Denmark, our study finds that journalists struggle to convert the ideals of clarity and objectivity into a coherent conceptual practice. Across interviews, journalists disagree on which concepts to use and how to define them, accusing academics of producing too technical definitions, politicians of diluting meaning, and journalistic peers of being insufficiently objective. Drawing on insights from journalism scholarship and rhetorical argumentation theory, we highlight how such disagreements reveal a fundamental tension in journalistic claims to epistemic authority, causing a continuous search for unambiguous terms, which in turn produces the very ambiguity that journalists seek to avoid.