Epistemic Injustice Research Articles

The environmental image: the case of white ignorance for epistemic justice

This paper argues for a redrawing of the boundaries of epistemic normativity that takes epistemic environments as their centre. The argument sets off from a case of sanctioned white ignorance (Spivak, A critique of postcolonial reason: Toward a history of the vanishing present 1999, Martín, Philosophical Quarterly, 71, 2021) and builds an analogy between the epistemic and the political normative terrains. This analogy, I argue, brings to light a new dimension of epistemic normativity that concerns the organisation and management of the channels through which epistemic resources are produced and made available in a community of knowers. This is what I call the ‘environmental model’ of epistemic normativity. The environmental model is contrasted with existing ‘agential models’, which centre on the psychology or the sociality of epistemic agents. In shifting the perspective from agents to environments, the environmental model is shown to provide a broader set of normative tools compared to existing agential accounts, and offer substantive advantages when it comes to thinking epistemically about structures and about epistemic injustice more broadly. In the attempt to reframe epistemic normativity in this way a wider ambition of this paper also is brought to light—namely, to make space for an image of the epistemological domain as fundamentally political.

Decolonising with imperial tools? The paradox of a global bioethics library.

This paper presents the Global Bioethics Library (GBL), an initiative developed by Black and Brown in Bioethics in response to recurring requests for more inclusive bioethics reading lists-requests that reflect deeper, structural gaps in the field. These gaps persist in mainstream bioethics pedagogy, literature and frameworks, which remain dominated by Western paradigms and the interests of global North countries, thereby marginalising knowledge and concerns from the global South and minoritised communities in the global North. Positioned as an epistemic justice project, the GBL was envisioned as a crowd-sourced, open-access resource that decentralises knowledge production and expands what is recognised as bioethics. However, the process of developing the library revealed deep tensions and limitations: most contributions came from the global North and continued to reflect dominant frameworks, despite efforts to adopt inclusive and democratic methods. These outcomes expose a controversial paradox-namely, that the very tools and structures used to 'decolonise' bioethics may be shaped by the same epistemic paradigms they aim to critique. This paper argues that intention alone is insufficient to redress epistemic injustice. Methods left critically unexamined and without reconfiguration risk reproducing exclusion under the guise of inclusion. The GBL thus serves as a case study in the controversies and contradictions of doing epistemic justice work within institutions and infrastructures built on unequal foundations. We offer this reflection not as a conclusion, but as an invitation for collaboration, critique and reimagining the politics of decolonial work in global bioethics.

Epistemic trust, epistemic vigilance, and epistemic injustice: Three interrelated constructs that are applicable to psychodynamic clinical work.

Epistemic trust, epistemic vigilance, and epistemic injustice: Three interrelated constructs that are applicable to psychodynamic clinical work.

Pain Dismissal and the Limits of Epistemic Injustice

Abstract This project aims to identify and explain a phenomenon I call pain-related motivational deficit, which occurs when there is proper uptake of the epistemic contributions of a pain utterance, but defective uptake of the motivational contributions of a pain utterance. I argue that the normalization of fibroid pain in Black women, and of menstrual pain more broadly, causes a pain-related motivational deficit to be unfairly assigned to utterances about these pain experiences. I show that current ways of thinking about epistemic injustice cannot adequately explain these cases.

Asserting Indigenous Academic Sovereignty Through Assemblage, Indigenization, and Cultural Safety.

Colonial academic institutions systematically marginalize Indigenous scholars and devalue Indigenous knowledge systems by privileging methodologies, epistemologies, and structures rooted in White-dominant cultural norms. This exclusion is a structural feature of what this paper terms colonial academia. These systems persist in nursing education and research due to tenure and promotion criteria, Institutional Review Board protocols, publishing standards, and the underrepresentation of Indigenous faculty. These mechanisms function to suppress relational, land-based, and community-driven approaches fundamental to Indigenous ways of knowing. Focusing on nursing academia, we explore how Indigenous scholars can resist these systemic barriers through three interconnected strategies: assemblage, Indigenization, and cultural safety. We share how these strategies are applied across nursing education, research, and policy, enabling scholars to assert knowledge sovereignty while navigating institutional constraints. Assemblage allows for the selective incorporation of colonial tools into Indigenous frameworks. Indigenization aims to restructure institutions through Indigenous governance, ethics, and pedagogy. Cultural safety ensures these transformations are accountable to Indigenous communities. Together, these strategies challenge epistemic injustice and offer a model for transforming colonial institutions from within. By illustrating how Indigenous scholars lead these efforts, this paper contributes to global conversations on decolonization in health sciences and higher education.

A Fork on the Road to Knowledge at Mauna Kea: The Thirty Meter Telescope, Perspectivalism, and Epistemic Injustice

ABSTRACT In this piece, I argue that the construction of the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) on the Big Island of Hawaii’s Mauna Kea constitutes both an ethical and epistemic – that is, knowledge-based – harm to Native Hawaiian (Kanaka ‘Ōiwi) communities. It is epistemically problematic, for its mandated construction is a public and material declaration of the primacy and privileged epistemic status afforded to Western scientific inquiry and analysis (including astronomy) over Traditional (Hawaiian) Ways of Knowing. It is a matter of ethics and social justice, for its construction further perpetuates an ongoing set of eco-cultural harms to the Kanaka ‘Ōiwi people.

A Journey Toward Self-Reconciliation via Indigenous Wisdom Unraveling Identity: A Contemporary Issue in Nursing.

With an acknowledgment of her unexamined role within the settler-Indigenous paradigm, heavily influenced by personal and familial histories of colonization in Korea, the author embarks on a journey of discovery. Drawing parallels between intergenerational traumas endured by Koreans during Japanese occupation and those experienced by Indigenous Peoples in Canada, this essay uncovers a sense of solidarity and prompts a critical re-evaluation of her position as a settler by challenging prevailing representations that often overlook non-European immigrants. A crucial moment in the author's transformation arises from encountering the work of Indigenous Scholar Dr. Baker (2021), shedding light on environmental and epistemic injustices that intersect with the author's familial ties to the Canadian oil industry. This recognition of complicity within settler colonial structures sparks an ethical and professional crisis, catalyzing a profound reassessment of her role within these dynamics. Central to the narrative is the concept of "unlearning" from Taoist philosophy, which advocates the dissolution of preconceived notions to attain an authentic understanding of reality. This philosophical journey intertwines with Foucauldian reflections on power and knowledge, framing the author's evolution toward a more ethically aware and culturally safe nursing practice. This essay calls for a decolonized approach to nursing. The author contributes to discourses on Asian settler colonialism within the settler-Indigenous dichotomy. Via this introspection, the author offers insights into how non-European immigrant nurses can engage in decolonization by promoting a model of inclusive practice particularly for those marginalized by historical injustices.

Caste and ‘feminist-agency’ in India: what has epistemic (in)justice got to do with it?

ABSTRACT This paper is a reflection on my academic journey with regards to the ethico-political and methodological challenges in researching the ‘Other(s)’. In trying to rethink the narration of the Partition-induced forced migration (1947–1971) through the intersecting lenses of caste, gender, labour and region, I took the intersectional category of lowered caste (Dalit-Bahujan), refugee women, located in the non-metropolitan city of Asansol in West Bengal, as my protagonists. For the exercise, the question that became ethically and methodologically crucial was: How can an academic enterprise by a (part) upper(ed) caste (Savarna) woman, that is enabled by the consumption of devalued, feminized labour of women, mostly from lowered caste (Dalit-Bahujan) groups, seek to understand such lives? I argue that imposing Brahmanical frames of interpretation – born out of caste privilege of the feminist author – to narrate such lives is to commit epistemic injustice. But to achieve epistemic justice, a simplistic deployment of self-reflexivity and empathy is not enough. Taking a relational approach – one that posits not only the upper(ed) and lowered caste femininity as co-constituted but also the researcher-researched relationship and their conceptual worlds as such – however, may provide for possibilities of greater epistemic justice and decolonization of knowledge.

Epistemic injustice and psychotherapy

ABSTRACT Psychotherapy is a form of psychological service that involves a collaborative process based on the relationship between a psychotherapist and a client/patient. The epistemic interdependence between psychotherapists and clients raises important questions concerning epistemic authority and power, as well as epistemic injustice, i.e., a kind of injustice that arises when one’s capacity as an epistemic agent is wrongfully denied. In this paper, we characterize, categorize, and discuss how epistemic injustice can be perpetrated in psychotherapy. To this end, we provide scenarios that illustrate ways in which three forms of epistemic injustice (testimonial, hermeneutical, and participatory) can arise in psychotherapeutic encounters, and explain how these forms of epistemic injustice threaten one’s ability to achieve self-understanding through psychotherapy. We finish by making some qualifications and briefly enumerating some ways to mitigate the risk of epistemic injustice in psychotherapy.

Linguistic Practices, Poverty and Epistemic Injustice: Unraveling Power, Dominant Discourses and Ethical Conundrums in Child ‘Protection’ Services in the South African Context

ABSTRACT Drawing on Fricker’s (2007) thesis on epistemic injustice we examine linguistic practices and dominant discourses in child ‘protection’ services (CPS) within pervasive positivist, neoliberal and New Public Management influences. Based on an analysis of referral reports of social workers motivating for placement of children in a residential facility, and reflections on the dialogical encounters among the authors, we interrogate social work’s core principles vis-a-vis daily practices. Results show that focus on the ‘best interests of the child’ often conflicts with parental rights, contribute to silencing of marginalized groups, and the disarticulation of risk assessment from socio-structural impacts on family life.

Narrowing history curriculum implementation gaps in Southern African countries: undoing the English hegemony

Despite the availability of well-crafted school history curricula in Southern African countries, policy-practice dissonance remains evident, suggesting some factors continue to widen implementation gaps. Employing policy documents and extant literature, this conceptual paper engages Bourdieu’s conceptual triad of practice – capital, habitus, and field – to make a case that employing dominant languages by teachers in history classrooms cultivates epistemic injustice and marginalises the students’ identities, thereby widening rather than narrowing history curriculum implementation gaps. Understanding how linguistic capital, habitus and field impact the history curriculum implementation gaps can provide fundamental insights into how school history teaching can be improved, not only in schools in Southern Africa but across the world where teachers overlook the linguistic resources that students bring to the class. The paper extends the discourse that questions the English hegemony in the implementation of the school history curriculum in countries that are characterised by linguistic diversity. Suggestions are proposed to dismantle English hegemony in the teaching of the school history curriculum, ultimately joining the implementation dots.

Overcoming epistemic injustice in Africa: a Global South perspective

ABSTRACT How could epistemic injustice in Africa be overcome effectively? To answer this question, it will be shown how changing the epistemic system that informs knowledge projects in Africa can help to overcome epistemic injustice and, ultimately, attain genuine epistemic justice. The article shows that it is necessary to carry out a critical appraisal of barriers that could potentially derail the epistemic system change thesis. That is, the thesis that African knowledge can only be successfully produced by breaking away from the dominant and alien epistemic system and instead grounding them in a specifically liberatory epistemic system, which is necessarily constructed by those living under epistemic injustice. In the first section, I revisit critically what the current literature has commonly taken to be viable solutions to epistemic injustice. Thereafter, I argue that the form of epistemic justice I have in mind could best be attained by undertaking liberatory knowledge projects on epistemic systems ideally set for this purpose.

Knowledge Gaps about Mining Impacts on Sami Lands

In the context of the EU’s Critical Raw Materials Act, which prioritizes mineral extraction and imposes time limits on project approvals, there have been a surge of policy proposals that aim to expedite licenses for green industry projects. Meanwhile, the academic literature largely overlooks risks for Indigenous Sami rights and reindeer herding. In this paper, we examine if a similar knowledge gap exists in a key part of the practitioner literature informing licensing decisions for new mines, namely environmental impact assessments (EIAs). To do so, we undertake a comparative synthesis of results from i) unpublished findings from a review of selected EIAs from mining companies in Sweden, and ii) a review of Sami knowledge about impacts at two mining sites in Sweden. Findings reveal a considerable mismatch between predicted impacts in corporate EIAs and those impacts experienced by herding communities. Using an epistemic justice lens, we argue that this knowledge gap is no coincidence—instead it reflects an epistemic injustice underlying European and hence Swedish minerals policy and its ambitions to fast-track licensing and exploit Sami lands in the name of the green transition.

Appropriating Empowerment: Precision Medicine’s Proclivity to Epistemic Injustice

Abstract Precision medicine (PM) encompasses various emerging, data-intensive healthcare and biomedical research initiatives aimed at tailoring care to individual patient characteristics. While “precision” primarily denotes an epistemological shift in how biomedical research is approached and care delivered, the conviction that PM empowers patients in clinical decision-making is central to its vision as it is taken up across policy contexts. In this paper, I critically assess these promises by drawing on recent engagements in agential epistemic injustice (Lackey 2020; Medina 2022). I suggest that the social, cultural, and epistemological conditions in which the epistemic practice of precision care unfolds are conducive to epistemic injustice. Despite PM’s explicit aims to address longstanding criticisms regarding the disease-centric nature of contemporary biomedical care practices by including person-centered, non-biomedical features in clinical consideration, exploring its underlying logic suggests its epistemic economy is stacked against patients’ epistemic interests. As such, despite its laudable aim of patient empowerment, the exacerbated risk of epistemic injustice might truncate patients’ (epistemic) agency, further disempowering them in clinical decision-making. To conclude, I suggest that the reliance on “empowerment”- and “person-centered care”-rhetoric dominating PM discourse is a case of epistemic appropriation (Davis 2018), further discouraging engagement with social, experiential, and phenomenological dimensions of illness, defanging critics of raising those concerns, and impeding the realization of epistemic justice in healthcare.

“Bimbo Idiots Fighting Against Their Own Best Interests”: Epistemic Injustice and Occupational Health in Porn Production

“Bimbo Idiots Fighting Against Their Own Best Interests”: Epistemic Injustice and Occupational Health in Porn Production

Mad, mentally ill and neurodivergent professionals: epistemic injustice in practice

In addition to fields of practice, the professions lay claim to particular domains of knowledge and expertise, privileging specific ways of thinking and doing. This limits space within the professions for the strengths of those who identify as Mad, mentally ill and/or neurodivergent (MMIND). This paper explores the experiences of twelve professionals from across Canada (occupational therapy, nursing, medicine, social work and academia) who identify as MMIND. Reflexive thematic analysis of qualitative interview data reveals epistemic injustice and violence – injustice concerning credibility as a legitimate knower. MMIND professionals were cast as incapable, incompetent, incredible, unwell, and in need of care, eroding their assumed authority and expertise as professionals. Though participants saw their MMIND identities as beneficial to their work, they navigated disclosures with considerable care. Pressured to contort their work and their self-presentation to meet normative standards, they experienced the epistemic violence of ‘smothering’ their own narratives to maintain credibility.

The role of clinicians in the looping effect: epistemic injustices and looping breaks.

The debate on whether psychiatric disorders can be studied as natural kinds has raised controversy, reviving socio-constructionist arguments about the influence of social factors on psychiatric categories. A key concept in this discussion is the "looping effect", which describes how individuals change in response to their classifications, necessitating revisions to those classifications. We argue that, until now, the broad discussions around the looping effect have greatly failed to integrate the perspectives surrounding clinicians and patients. We examine more closely the dynamic and unstable nature of psychiatric diagnoses by proposing two key hypotheses: first, that understanding the looping effect requires incorporating both clinician and patient viewpoints, and that when done adequately, such an incorporation can facilitate the work of the clinician by creating feedback loops (i.e., the iterative adjustment of clinical interpretations based on patient responses); and second, that epistemic injustices between clinicians and patients can create disruptions in these feedback loops, which we call "looping breaks", rendering them ineffective. Looping breaks can happen at the clinical level of the relationship between the patient and the clinician or at the nosological level (during the process of revising a classification). We suggest that looping breaks can be caused by a denial or minimization of credibility based on identity prejudice, or due to an epistemic disadvantage, affecting the experiential feedback of patients following the announcement of a diagnosis. To substantiate our claims, we first examine the impact of looping effects in the interaction between patients and clinicians. Second, we investigate the impact of these interactions at the nosological level, on the broader diagnostic framework. We identify epistemic injustices as critical factors that can lead to looping breaks at both levels, thus affecting the stability and validity of psychiatric diagnoses. Our findings underscore the importance of an epistemic approach to the looping effect, emphasizing both knowledge validity and justice in clinician-patient relationships and among clinicians themselves.

"The Idea of Not Having to Prove Anything in the Way I Needed, That Would Be Really Helpful": Exploring Adolescents' and Parents' Understanding of Youth Participation During Patient-Initiated Brief Admission Enrollment in Psychiatric Inpatient Care.

Enrollment in psychiatric inpatient care represents a pivotal moment in a young person's life, one that often reverberates through the entire family. This study seeks to illuminate how adolescents and parents navigate youth participation during Patient-Initiated Brief Admission enrollment, shedding light on how such involvement fosters recovery from mental health problems. Drawing on interviews with five adolescents and five parents, the study unpacks the intricate dynamics of participation, with thematic analysis revealing the underlying patterns and complexities. To deepen the understanding, theoretical frameworks of epistemic injustice and ecological systems theory are employed, offering rich perspectives on the interplay of knowledge, power, and the parental role in shaping participatory experiences. The findings show that participation is not a static concept but a relational process, rooted in trust and profoundly influenced by adolescents' ability to articulate their care needs. This capacity emerges as a cornerstone for enhancing meaningful participation and promoting recovery. Moreover, including parents in the enrollment process provides a dual vantage point-highlighting both the benefits and the challenges of inpatient care-while simultaneously enriching the participatory experience. The study underscores that youth participation in inpatient care is inherently dynamic, evolving through relationships with adults and fluctuating in intensity and frequency. Recognizing adolescents as emerging adults, capable of increasing autonomy despite health challenges, is essential to fostering equitable and empowering care. This perspective, crucial during inpatient enrollment, serves as a safeguard against epistemic injustice, ensuring that participation remains a pathway to recovery rather than a barrier.

Meaningful inclusion of people with dementia in interview research: adopting the "intentional stance".

Engaging people living with dementia in interview research presents unique ethical, methodological, and practical challenges. In recent years there is an increased recognition of the importance and value of meaningfully including people with dementia in research, and of the epistemic injustice of systematic exclusion. While there are a growing number of research papers suggesting strategies for fostering ethical and meaningful inclusion, this area is still very much in development, theoretically and methodologically. This paper outlines how a theoretical perspective on selfhood in dementia, which incorporates the concept of the "Intentional Stance" (as per Sabat), may be a useful means of reaching people with dementia in a meaningful way via open, curious and personhood-supporting interactions. Embodying the "intentional stance" refers to operating under the assumption that all behavior and interactions do have meaning(s), even if it is not immediately or intuitively evident to the researcher what the meaning(s) are. Here, we draw on excerpts from an interview I conducted with a person living with dementia about his experiences of and perspectives on respite and day services, using the intentional stance, in conjunction with a range of other strategies for maximizing reciprocal communication. The analysis highlights instances where the intentional stance was central to connecting with the person, and temporarily entering their lifeworld. Adopting this stance is a means of reducing the epistemic injustice that people with dementia have faced, through longstanding omission and exclusion from research, and from social spheres more broadly.

O algoritmo como arquivista: curadoria algorítmica, apagamentos estruturais e a luta pela memória coletiva no século XXI

Algorithmic curation of collective memory has become a critical phenomenon in the digital age, reshaping the production, preservation, and erasure of historical narratives. Platforms like Google, Facebook, and TikTok act as hegemonic archivists, governing memory through market-driven logics, reinforcing inequalities, and naturalizing algorithmic biases. This study examines how automated systems—powered by machine learning and engagement metrics—prioritize viral content while marginalizing dissident voices (e.g., removal of Black activist profiles). Through a systematic review (PRISMA) and theoretical analysis, it explores three dimensions: (1) the replacement of traditional archives with opaque curation; (2) structural erasures of marginalized narratives; and (3) resistances like community archives and decentralized models (blockchain). Findings reveal that algorithms fragment and commodify memory, deepening epistemic injustices (Fricker). An integrated framework (Halbwachs, Noble, Latour) is proposed, advocating for ethical governance with transparency and collective participation to counter digital hegemonies.