Systematic Literature Review on Social Epistemology of Science: Knowledge Production in Scientific Communities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24256/ideas.v13i2.8180Keywords:
Social Epistemology, Scientific Knowledge, Epistemic Trust, Institutional Norms, Epistemic InjusticeAbstract
This paper presents a systematic literature review of research published between 2015 and 2025 on the social epistemology of science, focusing on how scientific knowledge is produced within communities. Moving beyond traditional individualistic epistemologies, the review highlights four dominant themes: epistemic trust and authority, collaborative and collective knowledge production, institutional norms shaping epistemic practices, and epistemic injustice affecting marginalized groups. Findings reveal that scientific knowledge depends heavily on social interactions, trust networks, and institutional frameworks that guide what counts as credible and valuable knowledge. The review also uncovers the significant influence of funding structures, publication pressures, and performance metrics in shaping scientific inquiry, often privileging dominant voices and methodologies. Epistemic injustice emerges as a critical issue, emphasizing the need for more inclusive and diverse epistemic practices within science. By synthesizing philosophical and empirical work, this study underscores the importance of understanding science as a socially situated and institutionally embedded practice. The paper concludes by advocating for greater integration of diverse perspectives and institutional reforms aimed at promoting epistemic equity, accountability, and transparency. This social epistemological approach offers a promising framework for rethinking scientific knowledge production in ways that are more democratic, ethical, and responsive to contemporary challenges.
References
References
Anderson, E. (2012). Epistemic justice as a virtue of social institutions. Social Epistemology, 26(2), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2011.652211
Andersen, H. (2019). Neoliberal science and institutional influence on knowledge production. Journal of Science Policy, 12(3), 145–162.
Barnes, B., & Bloor, D. (1982). Relativism, rationalism and the sociology of knowledge. In M. Hollis & S. Lukes (Eds.), Rationality and relativism (pp. 21–47). MIT Press.
Bueter, A. (2021). Epistemic injustice and the marginalization of non-dominant knowers in scientific communities. Feminist Philosophy Quarterly, 7(1), 34–56.
de Ridder, J. (2020). Trust and authority in scientific testimony. Episteme, 17(2), 183–200. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2020.12
Fernández Pinto, L. (2020). Institutional epistemology: How funding and metrics shape scientific knowledge. Science and Technology Studies, 33(4), 78–95.
Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press.
Fuller, S. (1988). Social epistemology. Indiana University Press.
Goldman, A. I. (1999). Knowledge in a social world. Oxford University Press.
Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives. Cornell University Press.
Harding, S. (2015). Rethinking standpoint epistemology: Science and gender justice. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 40(2), 423–438. https://doi.org/10.1086/678089
Jasanoff, S. (2004). States of knowledge: The co-production of science and social order. Routledge.
Kitcher, P. (2001). Science, truth, and democracy. Oxford University Press.
Knorr Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Harvard University Press.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts (2nd ed.). Princeton University Press.
Longino, H. E. (2002). The fate of knowledge. Princeton University Press.
Masruddin, M., & Nasriandi, N. (2022). Lexical and Syntactical Errors Performed by Junior High School Student in Writing Descriptive Text. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 10(1), 1094-1100.
Masruddin, M., Amir, F., Langaji, A., & Rusdiansyah, R. (2023). Conceptualizing linguistic politeness in light of age. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 11(3), 41-55.
Medina, J. (2011). The epistemology of resistance: Gender and racial oppression, epistemic injustice, and resistant imaginations. Oxford University Press.
Miller, D. (2018). The social foundations of scientific authority. Philosophy of Science, 85(1), 54–75.
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Wray, K. B. (2021). Group epistemology and scientific collaboration: An integrative framework. Synthese, 198(5), 4187–4208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02766-x
Zollman, K. J. S. (2017). The epistemic benefits of interdisciplinary collaboration. Philosophy of Science, 84(4), 891–903.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Yanti Kristina Sinaga, M. Manugeren, Efendi Barus
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under an Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See the Effect of Open Access)
