How Evidential Pluralism Mitigates Epistemic Injustice in Evidence-Based Evaluation
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 19216680 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Alexandra Trofimov (0000-0002-4442-402X, University of Manchester, autor de correspondencia), Jon Williamson (0000-0003-0514-4209, University of Manchester) |
| Año | 2026 |
| Volumen | 56 |
| Número | 5 |
| Páginas | 451-477 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2026-06-05 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Philosophy of the Social Sciences (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 0048-3931 • E-ISSN: 1552-7441 |
| Editorial | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/00483931261458625 |
| OpenAlex | W7163634657 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Referencias citadas | 45 |
By prioritising certain kinds of evidence and devaluing or excluding other kinds of evidence, orthodox evidence-based evaluation practice perpetuates epistemic injustice, we argue. In contrast, by advocating a more inclusive approach to evidence, Evidential Pluralism can avoid these epistemic injustices. This motivates the adoption of Evidential Pluralism as a new methodology for evaluation. These arguments are supported by case studies concerning Covid-19 public face-mask mandates and global value chains for development. Consideration of epistemic injustice introduces a moral dimension to the debate concerning the epistemic virtues and limitations of the orthodox approach and Evidential Pluralism
Dimension (graph theory) · Injustice · Pluralism (philosophy) · Reflective equilibrium · Value (mathematics) · Value pluralism · Evaluation and Performance Assessment · Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies · Human Rights and Development
Evidence-Based Policy
World Development Report 2020
Studying complexity in health services research
Discerning the Primary Epistemic Harm in Cases of Testimonial Injustice
The challenge of complexity in health care
Poverty chains and global capitalism
Interpreting Causality in the Health Sciences
What is a mechanism? Thinking about mechanisms across the sciences
Evidence based medicine
Epistemic injustice in the age of evidence-based practice
Philosophical foundations of mixed methods research
Potential for epistemic injustice in evidence-based healthcare policy and guidance
Knowledge, Expertise and Science Advice During Covid-19
What Makes Epistemic Injustice an “Injustice”
Evolving Concepts of Epistemic Injustice
Epistemic injustice in healthcare
Rethinking Medical Knowledge in the Post‐Pandemic Era
Individual consent in cluster randomised trials for non-pharmaceutical interventions
Reconsidering evidence-based policy
The rise and relevance of qualitative research
Establishing the teratogenicity of Zika and evaluating causal criteria
Why There's No Cause to Randomize
Evidence-Based Policy
Evidential Pluralism in the Social Sciences
Economic and social upgrading dynamics in global manufacturing value chains
| Velocidad de citación | historical |
|---|---|
| Altamente citado | No |