The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“Likewise, authoritative knowledge emerges through organized critical scrutiny and communal validation rather than expertise alone [22].”
From Who speaks when machines read scripture: boundary-making and interpretive authority in AI-mediated religious knowledge (2026) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“Knowledge acquires legitimacy by passing through institutional processes of review, debate, and revision.”
From Who speaks when machines read scripture: boundary-making and interpretive authority in AI-mediated religious knowledge (2026) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“Longino's [22] social epistemology argues that epistemic authority emerges through organized criticism, peer evaluation, and communal scrutiny rather than through expertise alone.”
From Who speaks when machines read scripture: boundary-making and interpretive authority in AI-mediated religious knowledge (2026) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“Across the generative pipeline, successive transformations from cultural corpora to datasets, from datasets to base models, and from base models to instruction-tuned systems enact epistemic and normative boundaries that delimit what forms of meaning become legible, what interpretive options are foregrounded, and which traditions of validation remain visible or are displaced [11,17,22].”
From Who speaks when machines read scripture: boundary-making and interpretive authority in AI-mediated religious knowledge (2026) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“Expertise is therefore a necessary but insufficient condition for authority.”
From Who speaks when machines read scripture: boundary-making and interpretive authority in AI-mediated religious knowledge (2026) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“This separation reflects Longino's [22] model of epistemic communities, in which reliability emerges through structured critical interaction.”
From Who speaks when machines read scripture: boundary-making and interpretive authority in AI-mediated religious knowledge (2026) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“Longino's [22] model of epistemic communities and Serres's [35] notion of quasi-objects are relevant here: interpretive artefacts circulate within collectives, generating authority through structured participation rather than individual assertion.”
From Who speaks when machines read scripture: boundary-making and interpretive authority in AI-mediated religious knowledge (2026) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“Rather than locating legitimacy in model behavior or output quality, the framework situates it in publicly inspectable practices of disclosure, review, and validation that organize how interpretive claims are produced, circulated, and authorized [11,22].”
From Who speaks when machines read scripture: boundary-making and interpretive authority in AI-mediated religious knowledge (2026) · cites this paper as [22]
In the citing paper
“Because scientific theories, hypotheses, and models are based on human perceptual categories, concepts, and assumptions, bias-free research is not possible [121, 125, 137].”
From The ethics of using artificial intelligence in scientific research: new guidance needed for a new tool (2025) · cites this paper as [137]
In the citing paper
“Third, during the data-interpretation stage researchers make variousassumptions based on interpretive frameworks, analytical tools, concepts, and background theories (Elliott et al 2016, Longino 1990).”
From Data-Intensive Science and Research Integrity (2017) · cites this paper as Longino 1990
In the citing paper
“However, if an individual possesses too little background knowledge, he or she will not even be able to understand that the anomalous data are anomalous (cf.Lijnse, 1990;Longino, 1990).”
From The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. (1993) · cites this paper as Longino, 1990
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 601–700 of 1,002
Hawkesworth, M. (1999) · Women s Studies International Forum · doi:10.1016/s0277-5395(99)00003-5 · Cited by 27
A further analysis of the ethics of representation in virtual reality: Multi-user environments
Ford, P. J. (2001) · Ethics and Information Technology · doi:10.1023/a:1011846009390 · Cited by 27
Social epistemology and the ethics of research
Resnik, D. B. (1996) · Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A · doi:10.1016/0039-3681(96)00043-x · Cited by 27
Herman, D. (2008) · Poetics Today · doi:10.1215/03335372-073 · Cited by 27
Learning science in a first grade science activity: A Vygotskian perspective
Shepardson, D. P. (1999) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-237x(199909)83:5 · Cited by 49
Feminism(s) and Science Education
Brickhouse, N. W. (1998) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-011-4940-2_62 · Cited by 27
Macht- und Chancenstrukturen in der Wissenschaft
Graf, A. (2016) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-14900-0_3 · Cited by 26
PISA for Development Mathematics Framework
OECD (2018) · Programme for international student assessment/Internationale Schulleistungsstudie · doi:10.1787/9789264305274-5-en · Cited by 26
Social Routes to Belief and Knowledge
Goldman, A. I. (2002) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/0195138791.003.0008 · Cited by 26
Where is the epistemic community? On democratisation of science and social accounts of objectivity
Koskinen, I. (2016) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-016-1173-2 · Cited by 26
Bias and Groupthink in Science’s Peer-Review System
Resnik, D. B., & Smith, E. M. R. (2020) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-36822-7_9 · Cited by 29
How to Incorporate Non-Epistemic Values into a Theory of Classification
Reydon, T. A. C., & Ereshefsky, M. (2022) · European Journal for Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s13194-021-00438-6 · Cited by 26
Género y construcción científica del conocimiento
Bozal, A. G. (2016) · Revista Historia de la Educación Latinoamericana · doi:10.19053/01227238.5532 · Cited by 26
A Pragmatist and Feminist Relational (E)pistemology
Thayer‐Bacon, B. J. (2010) · European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy · doi:10.4000/ejpap.948 · Cited by 28
Feminist-Pragmatist Revisionings of Reason, Knowledge, and Philosophy
Rooney, P. (1993) · Hypatia · doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.1993.tb00089.x · Cited by 26
Critical Theory as Practical Knowledge: Participants, Observers, and Critics
Bohman, J. F. (2003) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470756485.ch4 · Cited by 26
Science and values in the biodiversity-ecosystem function debate
Frank, D. M. (2022) · Biology & Philosophy · doi:10.1007/s10539-022-09835-4 · Cited by 25
The importance of values for science
Douglas, H. (2023) · Interdisciplinary Science Reviews · doi:10.1080/03080188.2023.2191559 · Cited by 33
Science and Values: Are Value Judgments Always Irrelevant to the Justification of Scientific Claims?
Intemann, K. K. (2001) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1086/392932 · Cited by 25
Applying Gadamer’s concept of disposition to science and science education
Borda, E. J. (2007) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-007-9079-5 · Cited by 27
Rocca, E., & Andersen, F. (2017) · Life Sciences Society and Policy · doi:10.1186/s40504-017-0057-7 · Cited by 25
Öberg, G., & Campbell, A. (2018) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500693.2018.1548044 · Cited by 25
What’s feminist about feminist economics?
Tejani, S. (2018) · Journal of Economic Methodology · doi:10.1080/1350178x.2018.1556799 · Cited by 28
Hirvonen, I., & Karisto, J. (2022) · Theoria · doi:10.1111/theo.12395 · Cited by 30
Haslanger, S. (2012) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199892631.003.0006 · Cited by 25
Furman, K. (2022) · Social Epistemology · doi:10.1080/02691728.2022.2122756 · Cited by 25
Putting down the revolt: Enactivism as a philosophy of nature
Meyer, R., & Brancazio, N. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.948733 · Cited by 25
Ecology of the City as a Bridge to Urban Design
Pickett, S. T. A., Cadenasso, M. L., & McGrath, B. P. (2012) · Future city · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5341-9_1 · Cited by 26
Tlili, A., & Dawson, E. (2010) · Minerva · doi:10.1007/s11024-010-9160-0 · Cited by 25
Qu, S. Q., Ding, S., & Lukasewich, S. M. (2009) · European Accounting Review · doi:10.1080/09638180902863878 · Cited by 25
Race and IQ in the postgenomic age: The microcephaly case
Richardson, S. S. (2011) · BioSocieties · doi:10.1057/biosoc.2011.20 · Cited by 25
Androcentrism, Feminism, and Pluralism in Medicine
Bueter, A. (2015) · Topoi · doi:10.1007/s11245-015-9339-y · Cited by 28
Reading Elinor Ostrom through a Gender Perspective
Łapniewska, Z. (2016) · Feminist Economics · doi:10.1080/13545701.2016.1171376 · Cited by 25
Gender studies as a multi-centred field? Centres and peripheries in academic gender research
Wöhrer, V. (2016) · Feminist Theory · doi:10.1177/1464700116652840 · Cited by 29
Dynamic axes of informed consent in Japan
Sullivan, L. S. (2016) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.12.031 · Cited by 25
Identifying Pseudoscience: A Social Process Criterion
Dawes, G. W. (2018) · Journal for General Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s10838-017-9388-6 · Cited by 25
Information elaboration and epistemic effects of diversity
Steel, D. P., Fazelpour, S., Crewe, B., & Gillette, K. (2019) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-019-02108-w · Cited by 27
Miriti, M. N. (2019) · Education Sciences · doi:10.3390/educsci9040291 · Cited by 26
Fuller and Rouse on the Legitimation of Scientific Knowledge
Remedios, F. (2003) · Philosophy of the Social Sciences · doi:10.1177/0048393103257965 · Cited by 24
The Epistemic Significance of Social Pressure
Joshi, H. (2022) · Canadian Journal of Philosophy · doi:10.1017/can.2022.39 · Cited by 24
Expanding the Scope of Science Education to Engage with Anthropocene Challenges
Tytler, R., Monroe, M. C., Eames, C., & White, P. (2025) · Research in Science Education · doi:10.1007/s11165-025-10276-8 · Cited by 27
(Mis)Understanding scientific disagreement: Success versus pursuit-worthiness in theory choice
Lichtenstein, E. I. (2020) · Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A · doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2020.10.005 · Cited by 24
Ravenscroft, S., & Williams, P. F. (2021) · Accounting Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2021.101280 · Cited by 24
Scientific Knowledge vs. Knowledge of Science
Chakravartty, A. (2022) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-022-00376-6 · Cited by 24
To FRA or not to FRA: What is the question for science education?
Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2023) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-023-00425-8 · Cited by 24
Sisyphean science: why value freedom is worth pursuing
Menon, T., & Stegenga, J. (2023) · European Journal for Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s13194-023-00552-7 · Cited by 24
Naturalized Epistemology and Dilemmas of Planning Practice
Saarikoski, H. (2002) · Journal of Planning Education and Research · doi:10.1177/0739456x0202200101 · Cited by 26
Feminist epistemology as social epistemology
Grasswick, H., & Webb, M. O. (2002) · Social Epistemology · doi:10.1080/0269172022000025570 · Cited by 24
From black and white to shades of grey
Leden, L., Hansson, L., & Redfors, A. (2017) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-017-9920-4 · Cited by 24
Family Development Theory 30 Years Later
Martin, T. F. (2018) · Journal of Family Theory & Review · doi:10.1111/jftr.12237 · Cited by 24
Institutions and ‘Science’: The Contest about Pluralism in Economics in France
Chavance, B., & Labrousse, A. (2018) · Review of Political Economy · doi:10.1080/09538259.2018.1449472 · Cited by 24
Values in economics: a recent revival with a twist
Małecka, M. (2021) · Journal of Economic Methodology · doi:10.1080/1350178x.2020.1868776 · Cited by 24
Correia, V. (2012) · Informal Logic · doi:10.22329/il.v32i2.3530 · Cited by 24
Gender Thinking in the Making: Feminist Epistemology and Gender Archaeology
Rubio, S. L. (2011) · Norwegian Archaeological Review · doi:10.1080/00293652.2011.572674 · Cited by 31
Acceptance, values, and probability
Steel, D. P. (2015) · Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A · doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.05.010 · Cited by 24
Philosophy of Science that Ignores Science: Race, IQ and Heritability
Sesardić, N. (2000) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1086/392856 · Cited by 24
Practical reasoning and science education: Implications for theory and practice
Brickhouse, N. W., Stanley, W. B., & Whitson, J. A. (1993) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/bf00488172 · Cited by 24
Bassett, K. (1996) · Environment and Planning D Society and Space · doi:10.1068/d140507 · Cited by 24
Education as Sustainability : an Action Research Study of the Burns Model of Sustainability Pedagogy
Burns, H. L. (2000) · doi:10.15760/etd.942 · Cited by 24
Institutions and Scientific Progress
Mantzavinos, C. (2020) · Philosophy of the Social Sciences · doi:10.1177/0048393120978453 · Cited by 23
Pandemics, policy, and pluralism: A Feyerabend-inspired perspective on COVID-19
Bschir, K., & Lohse, S. (2022) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-022-03923-4 · Cited by 26
Justifying Scientific Progress
Stegenga, J. (2023) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1017/psa.2023.118 · Cited by 23
Valuing What You Risk and Risking What You Value: Advancing a research agenda for risk studies
Jarzabkowski, P. A., Unger, C., & Meissner, K. (2024) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/01708406241290038 · Cited by 23
The epistemic revolution of AI: reconfiguring the foundations of scientific knowledge
Cruz‐Aguilar, M. A. (2025) · AI & Society · doi:10.1007/s00146-025-02658-3 · Cited by 23
The Value Ladenness of Scientific Knowledge
Doppelt, G. (2007) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195308969.003.0013 · Cited by 23
Feyerabend’s well-ordered science: how an anarchist distributes funds
Shaw, J. (2018) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-018-02026-3 · Cited by 23
Watkins, J., Jaber, L. Z., & Dini, V. (2020) · Journal of Science Teacher Education · doi:10.1080/1046560x.2020.1727622 · Cited by 23
Koskinen, I. (2020) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-020-02645-9 · Cited by 25
A Framework for Analyzing Broadly Engaged Philosophy of Science
Plaisance, K. S., & Elliott, K. C. (2021) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1086/713891 · Cited by 23
How Are Biology Concepts Used and Transformed?
Brigandt, I. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108648981.006 · Cited by 24
Open Theorizing in Management and Organization Studies
Leone, P. V., Mantere, S., & Faraj, S. A. (2021) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2019.0279 · Cited by 23
Wagner, G., & Zizzamia, D. (2021) · Ethics Policy & Environment · doi:10.1080/21550085.2021.1940449 · Cited by 25
Feminist Epistemology and Business Ethics
Kaufmann, L. (2021) · Business Ethics Quarterly · doi:10.1017/beq.2021.33 · Cited by 23
Pickett, S. T. A., Simone, A., Anderson, P., Sharifi, A., Barau, A. S., Hoover, F.-A., Childers, D. L., McPhearson, T., Muñoz‐Erickson, T. A., Pacteau, C., et al. (2024) · AMBIO · doi:10.1007/s13280-024-02001-y · Cited by 28
Intercultural Education as Dialogue Between Knowledge Systems: Elements of a Theoretical Framework
El-Hani, C. N., & Ludwig, D. (2024) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-024-00525-z · Cited by 27
Psychological Measurement and Methodological Realism
Hood, S. B. (2013) · Erkenntnis · doi:10.1007/s10670-013-9502-z · Cited by 23
Feminism and the History of Economic Thought
Seiz, J. A. (1993) · History of Political Economy · doi:10.1215/00182702-25-1-185 · Cited by 23
Do men and women perform academic work differently?
Ramos, A. M. G., Palacín, F. F., & Márquez, M. M. (2015) · Tertiary Education and Management · doi:10.1080/13583883.2015.1065904 · Cited by 23
Caronia, L. (2018) · Journal of Organizational Ethnography · doi:10.1108/joe-12-2017-0067 · Cited by 23
Food Systems Sustainability: An Examination of Different Viewpoints on Food System Change
Haysom, G., Olsson, E. G. A., Dymitrow, M., Opiyo, P. O., Buck, N. T., Oloko, M. O., Spring, C., Fermskog, K., Ingelhag, K., Kotze, S., et al. (2019) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su11123337 · Cited by 27
Feministische Wissenschaftskritik und Epistemologie: Voraussetzungen, Positionen, Perspektiven
Singer, M. (2004) · VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-322-99461-5_31 · Cited by 23
Five Arguments for Increasing Public Participation in Making Science Policy
Foltz, F. A. (1999) · Bulletin of Science Technology & Society · doi:10.1177/027046769901900206 · Cited by 23
Whitten, B. L. (1996) · NWSA Journal · doi:10.2979/nws.1996.8.2.1 · Cited by 23
Lester, F. K., & Lambdin, D. V. (1998) · New ICMI studies series · doi:10.1007/978-94-011-5470-3_28 · Cited by 23
Detel, W. (2015) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.63081-7 · Cited by 23
(2006) · Duke University Press eBooks · doi:10.1215/9780822388128-005 · Cited by 22
Moisander, J. K. (2006) · Kluwer Academic Publishers eBooks · doi:10.1007/0-306-48160-x_5 · Cited by 22
What’s wrong with aspiring to find out what has really happened in academic feminism’s recent past?
Torr, R. (2007) · Feminist Theory · doi:10.1177/1464700106069041 · Cited by 22
Autonomy and Objectivity of Science
Kuukkanen, J. (2012) · International Studies in the Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1080/02698595.2012.731733 · Cited by 22
Verbal Sparring and Apologetic Points: Politeness in Gendered Argumentation Contexts
Burrow, S. J. (2010) · Informal Logic · doi:10.22329/il.v30i3.3033 · Cited by 22
Simplicity, one-shot hypotheses and paleobiological explanation
Currie, A. (2019) · History & Philosophy of the Life Sciences · doi:10.1007/s40656-019-0247-0 · Cited by 22
Gundersen, T. (2020) · Perspectives on Science · doi:10.1162/posc_a_00334 · Cited by 22
What is epistemically wrong with research affected by sponsorship bias? The evidential account
Reutlinger, A. (2020) · European Journal for Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s13194-020-00280-2 · Cited by 22
A Tool for Visualizing and Inquiring into Whole-Class Sensemaking Discussions
Colley, C., & Windschitl, M. (2020) · Research in Science Education · doi:10.1007/s11165-020-09962-6 · Cited by 22
Wherein is the concept of disease normative? From weak normativity to value-conscious naturalism
Amoretti, M. C., & Lalumera, E. (2021) · Medicine Health Care and Philosophy · doi:10.1007/s11019-021-10048-x · Cited by 22
Cologna, V., Baumberger, C., Knutti, R., Орескес, Н., & Berthold, A. (2022) · Environmental Communication · doi:10.1080/17524032.2022.2153896 · Cited by 22
Science and values: a two-way direction
Ratti, E., & Federica Russo, B. (2024) · European Journal for Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1007/s13194-024-00567-8 · Cited by 22
Debating nuclear energy: Theories of risk and purposes of communication
Mirel, B. (1994) · Technical Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10572259409364557 · Cited by 22
Truijens, F. L. (2016) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-016-1188-8 · Cited by 22
PISA 2018 Financial Literacy Framework
OECD (2019) · Programme for international student assessment/Internationale Schulleistungsstudie · doi:10.1787/a1fad77c-en · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Longino, H. E.
- Corresponding author
- Longino, Helen E.
- ORCID
- Longino, Helen E.
- Venue
- Princeton University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Princeton University Press
- Published
- 1990-12-31
- OpenAlex
- W4300559119
- Cited by
- 3,092
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 244 · 2025: 296 · 2024: 188 · 2023: 169 · 2022: 212 · 2021: 160 · 2020: 145 · 2019: 173 · 2018: 128 · 2017: 86 · 2016: 73 · 2015: 100 · 2014: 60 · 2013: 80 · 2012: 58
- FWCI
- 81.08
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Princeton University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy of Biology and Scientific Explanation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Logic and Philosophy of Science
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Education, Politics, and Culture Studies
- Keywords
- philosophy of science, sociology of science, scientific knowledge, epistemology of science
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
