The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
From “She Would Say That, Wouldn't She?” to “Does She Take Sugar?” Epistemic Injustice and Disability
Open accessAbstract
Epistemic injustice is the idea that social power ensures that the knowledge of some groups is excluded from the collective epistemic resources. In this paper, I argue that there are distinctive features of disabled life that, because they shape the processes through which knowledge is gathered, evaluated, judged, and disseminated, also influence the ways in which epistemic injustice is experienced by disabled people. These features include the ascription of a global epistemic incapacity to people affected by impairment. Against a background of contemporary political shifts and biotechnology innovation, the implications of epistemic injustice for disabled people are serious.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“These infrastructural barriers then compound into epistemic violence , the systematic dismissal of disabled researchers' knowledge claims [21, 64].”
From "I Don't Trust Any Professional Research Tool": A Re-Imagination of Knowledge Production Workflows by, with, and for Blind and Low-Vision Researchers (2026) · cites this paper as [64]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“When evaluation systems conflate medium with quality, they create what Scully describes as hermeneutical injustice [64]: BLV researchers' contributions are undervalued because evaluative frameworks embody ableist assumptions about what recognizing excellence looks like.”
From "I Don't Trust Any Professional Research Tool": A Re-Imagination of Knowledge Production Workflows by, with, and for Blind and Low-Vision Researchers (2026) · cites this paper as [64]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing
Fricker, M. (2007) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198237907.001.0001 · Cited by 9,198
Sour Grapes: Studies in the Subversion of Rationality
Elster, J. (1983) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139171694 · Cited by 1,577
Sour Grapes. Studies in the Subversion of Rationality.
Farmer, M. K., & Elster, J. (1984) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2232246 · Cited by 1,275
Conceptualizing Epistemic Oppression
Dotson, K. (2014) · Social Epistemology · doi:10.1080/02691728.2013.782585 · Cited by 1,232
The Routledge Handbook of Epistemic Injustice
(2017) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315212043 · Cited by 1,203
A Cautionary Tale: On Limiting Epistemic Oppression
Dotson, K. (2012) · Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies · doi:10.1353/fro.2012.a472779 · Cited by 874
Epistemic injustice in healthcare: a philosophial analysis
Carel, H., & Kidd, I. J. (2014) · Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy · doi:10.1007/s11019-014-9560-2 · Cited by 749
Relational Knowing and Epistemic Injustice: Toward a Theory of Willful Hermeneutical Ignorance
Pohlhaus, G. (2012) · Hypatia · doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01222.x · Cited by 745
Padden, C., & Humphries, T. (2009) · doi:10.2307/j.ctvjz83v3 · Cited by 664
The Minority Body: A Theory of Disability
Barnes, E. (2016) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198732587.001.0001 · Cited by 596
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Campbell Fiona Kumari, 2008, M/C Journal, 11
- Dotson Kristie, 2012, Frontiers: A Journal of Women's Studies, 33, 24, 10.5250/fronjwomestud.33.1.0024 · DOI · Paper page
- Fricker Miranda, 2006, Episteme: A Journal of Social Epistemology, 3, 96, 10.1353/epi.0.0004 · DOI · Paper page
- Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 2016. Genome Editing: An Ethical Review. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics. http://nuffieldbioethics.org/wp-content/uploads/Genome-editing-an-ethical-review.pdf
- Savulescu Julian, 2002, BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 325, 771
Cited by
Sorted by citations
"I am just terrified of my future" Epistemic Violence in Disability Related Technology Research
Ymous, A., Spiel, K., Keyes, O., Williams, R. M., Good, J., Hornecker, E., & Bennett, C. L. (2020) · Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3334480.3381828 · Cited by 160
The Harm of Ableism: Medical Error and Epistemic Injustice
Peña-Guzmán, D. M., & Reynolds, J. M. (2019) · Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal · doi:10.1353/ken.2019.0023 · Cited by 132
Epistemic Oppression and Ableism in Bioethics
Wieseler, C. (2020) · Hypatia · doi:10.1017/hyp.2020.38 · Cited by 74
Healthcare Practice, Epistemic Injustice, and Naturalism
Kidd, I. J., & Carel, H. (2018) · Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement · doi:10.1017/s1358246118000620 · Cited by 71
Epistemic Injustice in Late-Stage Dementia: A Case for Non-Verbal Testimonial Injustice
Spencer, L. J. (2022) · Social Epistemology · doi:10.1080/02691728.2022.2103474 · Cited by 59
Metadata
- Authors
- Scully, J. L.
- Corresponding author
- Scully, Jackie Leach
- ORCID
- Scully, Jackie Leach
- Venue
- International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics
- Published
- 2018-02
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 106-124
- ISSN
- 1937-4577 (ISSN-L)
- 1937-4585
- OpenAlex
- W2793317418
- Cited by
- 128
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 15.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics (publishedVersion)
- UNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disability Rights and Representation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
- Keywords
- epistemic injustice, disability, people with disabilities, social power, knowledge production, epistemic exclusion, biotechnology
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
