A Cautionary Tale: On Limiting Epistemic Oppression
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Oppression does not necessarily stifle a community's capacity for making sense of their particular social experiences; marginalized groups are not doomed to perceive their experiences of oppression 'through a glass darkly'.
“However, as is well documented, oppression does not necessarily stifle a community's capacity for making sense of their particular social experiences; marginalized groups are not doomed to perceive their experiences of oppression 'through a glass darkly'.”
From Agency and authority: A differentiated model of hermeneutical power (2025) · cites this paper as Dotson 2012
Marginalized groups often develop novel concepts and terms for articulating aspects of social life that dominant frameworks are ill-equipped to map.
“Indeed, as others in the hermeneutical injustice literature are quick to point out, they often develop novel concepts and terms for articulating aspects of social life that dominant frameworks are ill-equipped to map (Mason 2011 ;Dotson 2012 ;Medina 2012Medina , 2013 ) ).”
From Agency and authority: A differentiated model of hermeneutical power (2025) · cites this paper as Dotson 2012
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 874
- Authors
- Dotson, K.
- Corresponding author
- Dotson, Kristie
- ORCID
- Dotson, Kristie
- Venue
- Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies
- Publisher
- Project MUSE
- Published
- 2012
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 24-47
- ISSN
- 0160-9009 (ISSN-L)
- 1536-0334
- OpenAlex
- W1565892616
- Cited by
- 874
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 126 · 2025: 201 · 2024: 135 · 2023: 106 · 2022: 93 · 2021: 57 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 4.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Frontiers A Journal of Women Studies (publishedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Feminist Theory and Gender Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
- Keywords
- epistemic oppression, epistemic injustice, women's knowledge, gender and knowledge, feminist epistemology
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
