Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 31

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Gendered, Epistemic Injustices of Generative AI

Barry, Isobel, Stephenson, Elise·2025·Australian Feminist Studies
DOI 10.1080/08164649.2025.2480927
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/08164649.2025.2480927

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Image 1
CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 2
CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 3
CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 1 Case study analysis framework - testimonial injustice.
Figure 1 Case study analysis framework - testimonial injustice.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 Conditions of hermeneutical injustice flowchart (Oliveira 2022).
Figure 2 Conditions of hermeneutical injustice flowchart (Oliveira 2022).CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Research works printed but not linked: 50

  1. Adam, A. 1995a. “Artificial Intelligence and Women’s Knowledge: What Can Feminist Epistemologies Tell Us?” Women’s Studies International Forum 18 (4): 407–415. · doi:10.1016/0277-5395(95)00042-b
  2. 10.1177/135050689500200305 · DOI
  3. 10.1080/19371918.2011.619449 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1177/00113921211057609 · DOI
  5. 10.1007/s10734-022-00937-2 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1111/josp.12348 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1007/s10677-022-10324-6 · DOI
  8. Connell, R. 2021. Gender: In World Perspective. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  9. Criado-Perez, C. 2019. Invisible Women. New York: Abrams Books.
  10. 10.1177/00178969241274621 · DOI
  11. 10.1111/hypa.12251 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1037/pspa0000188 · DOI
  13. Eagly, A. H., and L. L. Carli. 2007. Through the Labyrinth: The Truth About How Women Become Leaders. New York: Harvard Business School Press.
  14. 10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573 · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.109.3.573 · Paper page
  15. Europol Innovation Lab. 2022. Facing Reality? Law Enforcement and the Challenge of Deepfakes. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg: European Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation.
  16. 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.12.007 · DOI
  17. 10.1353/epi.0.0004 · doi:10.1353/epi.0.0004 · Paper page
  18. Fürst, M. 2024. “Closing the Conceptual Gap in Epistemic Injustice.” The Philosophical Quarterly 74 (1): 235.
  19. 10.1145/3600211.3604672 · DOI
  20. 10.1177/20539517241252131 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Gutiérrez y Muhs, G., Y. F. Niemann, A. P. Harris, and C. G. González. 2012. Presumed Incompetent: The Intersections of Race and Class for Women in Academia. Boulder: University Press of Colorado.
  22. 10.4324/9781315437095 · doi:10.4324/9781315437095
  23. 10.1108/GM-02-2019-0015 · DOI
  24. Lamensch, M. 2024. Digital Authoritarianism: The Role of Legislation and Regulation. Waterloo, Canada: Centre for International Governance Innovation.
  25. Lobel, O. 2023. The Equality Machine: Harnessing Digital Technology for a Brighter, More Inclusive Future. New York: PublicAffairs.
  26. 10.1007/s00146-024-02129-1 · DOI
  27. 10.1177/014616728063023 · DOI · Paper page
  28. 10.1080/02691728.2010.534568 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.1017/epi.2024.11 · DOI · Paper page
  30. 10.1016/j.orgdyn.2023.100998 · DOI
  31. 10.1007/s00146-023-01675-4 · DOI · Paper page
  32. 10.30965/9783657703227_008 · doi:10.30965/9783657703227_008
  33. Pettit, B., and J. Hook. 2009. Gendered Tradeoffs: Family, Social Policy, and Economic Inequality in Twenty-One Countries. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
  34. 10.1080/10887150802371799 · DOI
  35. 10.4018/978-1-61350-116-0.ch023 · DOI
  36. Rollock, N. 2019. Staying Power, the Career Experiences and Strategies of UK Black Female Professors. London: University and College Union.
  37. 10.1111/bjso.12606 · DOI
  38. 10.1024/1421-0185.65.1.15 · DOI
  39. 10.1101/275362 · DOI
  40. 10.1111/1467-9280.00111 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.1093/jcmc/zmad045 · DOI · Paper page
  42. 10.1177/2277975220975513 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Thomas, M., and M. Veit. 2024. The Impact of AI on LGBTIQ+ People. Brussels: Forbidden Colours.
  44. 10.1016/j.jrp.2020.103984 · DOI
  45. UNESCO. 2024. Challenging Systematic Prejudices: An Investigation Into Bias Against Women and Girls in Large Language Models. Paris: International Research Centre on Artificial Intelligence.
  46. 10.1609/aaaiss.v3i1.31251 · DOI
  47. Vijeyarasa, R. 2023. “Gendered Harms and the Regulation of Artificial Intelligence: A Comparative Assessment of Emerging Legislative Practice.” Notre Dame Journal on Emerging Technologies 5 (1): 514–161. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4708877.
  48. 10.3127/ajis.v24i0.2799 · DOI
  49. Wiener, J., and J. Mowen. 1986. “Source Credibility: On the Independent Effects of Trust and Expertise.” Advances in Consumer Research 13 (1): 306–310.
  50. 10.1111/ntwe.12278 · DOI

Cited by

See all 31

Metadata

Authors
Barry, I., & Stephenson, E.
Affiliations
Global Institute for Women's Leadership, Australian National University
Venue
Australian Feminist Studies
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2025-01-02
Volume
40
Issue
123
Pages
1-21
ISSN
  • 0816-4649
  • 1465-3303
DOI
10.1080/08164649.2025.2480927
Cited by
31
References
8
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Gendered, Epistemic Injustices of Generative AI. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/08164649.2025.2480927
The paper
Barry, I., & Stephenson, E. (2025). The Gendered, Epistemic Injustices of Generative AI. Australian Feminist Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/08164649.2025.2480927

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.